Menlo Park City Council
September 20, 2022

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org City Council

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
Date: 9/20/2022
Time: 6:00 p.m.

Location: Zoom.us/join – ID# 831 3316 9409
NOVEL CORONAVIRUS, COVID-19, EMERGENCY ADVISORY NOTICE
Consistent with Government Code section 54953(e), and in light of the declared state of emergency, and maximize public safety while still maintaining transparency and public access, members of the public can listen to the meeting and participate using the following methods.

How to participate in the meeting
• Submit a written comment online up to 1-hour before the meeting start time:
[email protected]
Please include the agenda item number you are commenting on. • Access the meeting real-time online at:

Zoom.us/join – Meeting ID 831 3316 9409
• Access the meeting real-time via telephone at:
(669) 900-6833
Meeting ID 831 3316 9409
Press *9 to raise hand to speak
• Watch meeting:
• Cable television subscriber in Menlo Park, East Palo Alto, Atherton, and Palo Alto:

Channel 26
Note: City Council closed sessions are not broadcast online or on television and public participation is limited to the beginning of closed session.

Subject to Change: Given the current public health emergency and the rapidly evolving federal, state, county and local orders, the format of this meeting may be altered or the meeting may be canceled. You may check on the status of the meeting by visiting the City’s website www.menlopark.org. The instructions for logging on to the webinar and/or the access code is subject to change. If you have difficulty accessing the webinar, please check the latest online edition of the posted agenda for updated information (menlopark.org/agenda).

According to City Council policy, all meetings of the City Council are to end by midnight unless there is a super majority vote taken by 11:00 p.m. to extend the meeting and identify the items to be considered after 11:00 p.m.

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
September 20, 2022

Regular Session (Zoom.us/join – ID# 831 3316 9409)
A. Call To Order
B. Roll Call
C. Agenda Review
D. Public Comment
Under “Public Comment,” the public may address the City Council on any subject not listed on the agenda. Each speaker may address the City Council once under public comment for a limit of three minutes. Please clearly state your name and address or political jurisdiction in which you live. The City Council cannot act on items not listed on the agenda and, therefore, the City Council cannot respond to non-agenda issues brought up under public comment other than to provide general information.

E. Presentations and Proclamations
E1. Certificate of Recognition: Olivia Hom, Menlo Park Sister Cities Young Artists and Authors Showcase winner (Attachment)
F. Study Session
F1. Direction for city hosted events and observances including events based on holidays of religious origin (Staff Report #22-188-CC) (Presentation) G. Consent Calendar
G1. Adopt a resolution to continue conducting the City’s Council and advisory body meetings remotely due to health and safety concerns for the public and to authorize the use of hybrid meetings (Staff Report #22-177-CC)
G2. Adopt a resolution updating the City’s conflict of interest code (Staff Report #22-176-CC) G3. Authorize the city manager to enter into an agreement with the City of Redwood City for annual maintenance of Atherton Channel (Staff Report #22-178-CC) G4. Award a construction contract to Blue Flame Crew West, LLC for the Bedwell Bayfront Park landfill leachate and gas collection systems improvement project (Staff Report #22-179-CC) G5. Waive the second reading and adopt an ordinance repealing and replacing Menlo Park Municipal Code Section 2.04.190 relating to filling City Council vacancies (Staff Report #22-180-CC) G6. Adopt a resolution establishing the process for appointment of candidates to City Council seats to fill vacancies (Staff Report #22-181-CC)
G7. Adopt a resolution amending City Council Policy CC-22-004 Commissions/Committees Policies and Procedures, Roles and Responsibilities (Staff Report #22-182-CC)

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
September 20, 2022

G8. Authorize the city manager to enter into a contract with ICF Jones and Stokes Inc. to prepare an environmental impact report for the proposed master plan project at 333 Ravenswood Avenue (Parkline) for the amount of $688,817 and future augments as may be necessary to complete the environmental review for the proposed project (Staff Report #22-183-CC) G9. Approve the Parks and Recreation Commission’s 2022-23 work plan (Staff Report #22-184-CC) H. Regular Business
H1. Adopt resolutions authorizing staff to submit applications to the San Mateo County Transportation Authority for Measure A & W Pedestrian and Bicycle Program (Staff Report #22-185-CC) I. Informational Items
I1. City Council agenda topics: October 2022 (Staff Report #22-186-CC) I2. Police department quarterly update – Q4 May 2022 – July 2022 (Staff Report #22-187-CC) J. City Manager's Report
K. City Councilmember Reports
L. Adjournment
At every regular meeting of the City Council, in addition to the public comment period where the public shall have the right to address the City Council on any matters of public interest not listed on the agenda, members of the public have the right to directly address the Council on any item listed on the agenda at a time designated by the chair, either before or during the City Council’s consideration of the item.

At every special meeting of the City Council, members of the public have the right to directly address the City Council on any item listed on the agenda at a time designated by the chair, either before or during consideration of the item.

For appeal hearings, appellant and applicant shall each have 10 minutes for presentations.

If you challenge any of the items listed on this agenda in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Menlo Park at, or prior to, the public hearing.

Any writing that is distributed to a majority of the City Council by any person in connection with an agenda item is a public record (subject to any exemption under the Public Records Act) and is available by request by emailing the city clerk at [email protected]. Persons with disabilities, who require auxiliary aids or services in attending or participating in City Council meetings, may call the City Clerk’s Office at 650-330-6620.

Agendas are posted in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2(a) or Section 54956. Members of the public can view electronic agendas and staff reports by accessing the City website at menlopark.org/agenda and can receive email notification of agenda and staff report postings by subscribing to the “Notify Me” service at menlopark.org/notifyme.

Agendas and staff reports may also be obtained by contacting City Clerk at 650-330-6620. (Posted: 9/15/2022)

CERTIFICATE OF

RECOGNITION
Presented to
Olivia Hom
In appreciation for your artwork entry to Sister Cities International’s annual
Young Authors and Artists Authors Showcase
representing Menlo Park, California.

Presented September 20, 2022
Betsy Nash, Mayor
City of Menlo Park
AGENDA ITEM E-1
Page E-1.1
Library and Community Services

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org

STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 9/20/2022
Staff Report Number: 22-188-CC
Study Session: Direction for city hosted events and observances including events based on holidays of religious
origin
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council provide direction related to city-hosted community events and observances, including observances based on holidays of religious origin.

Policy Issues
City Council sets policy and goals and provides direction to staff regarding municipal projects and services to the Menlo Park community.

Background
City-owned facilities were closed to indoor public access March 12, 2020, due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

This precaution was necessary to protect public health by minimizing opportunities for congregation, both by the public and employees. Due to the infeasibility of safely hosting in-person community events during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to comply with public heath restrictions set by the County and State, city-hosted in-person community events were suspended during fiscal year 2020-21. Additionally, severe economic hardships predicated by the pandemic resulted in substantial reductions to City revenues, necessitating significant reductions to personnel and operating expenditures, and thus the City’s capacity to deliver services to the community, in order to achieve a balanced fiscal year 2020-21 operating budget. City Council took the difficult but positive action to prioritize the City’s limited resources in fiscal year 2020-21 to focus on the most critical needs.

On April 27, 2021, the City Council reviewed a phase-in sequence for safely and sustainably expanding access to public facilities and services, including community events and observances. It was noted that large-scale special events, whether indoors or outdoors, result in large, high-density gatherings of people from numerous households that carry the greatest risk of viral spread, and can take several months of advance planning and investment in financial and personnel resources to execute safely and effectively. For these reasons, large-scale events were proposed to be among the last city programs to reactivate.

On December 8, 2021, the Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed an anticipated timeline and format for City-organized community gatherings and observances, including COVID-19 precautions and rules; limited budget and staff capacity for large-scale community gatherings; other resource-intensive priority projects in progress such as the Menlo Park Community Campus opening in 2023; focus on smaller-scale events of fewer than 1,000 attendees in 2022-23; balancing traditions with evolving community needs; showcasing the Menlo Park community through culture, music and the arts; and connecting community events with volunteerism, fundraising, and community action to benefit all Menlo Park residents.

AGENDA ITEM F-1 Page F-1.1
Staff Report #: 22-188-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org During fiscal year 2021-22, efforts to end the pandemic and achieve economic recovery at the national and local levels achieved some success. Changes to County and State public health restrictions and the advent of COVID-19 vaccines, combined with economic stimulus and recovery, provided the opportunity for City Council to restore and reactivate multiple city programs in the fiscal year 2021-22 operating budget.

However, substantial surges in COVID-19 cases, driven by the Delta variant in the third and fourth quarters of 2021, and the Omicron variant in the fourth quarter of 2021 and first quarter of 2022, further delayed the reactivation timeline of other programs, for example gymnastics and large-scale community events, due to ongoing public health and safety concerns.

On June 17, 2022, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorized emergency use of the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine and the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine for children as young as six months of age. That authorization ensured that safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines are freely and widely available to the vast majority of residents who are medically eligible.

Analysis
In 2022, the City resumed hosting some community events, starting with smaller-scale events that were expected to attract fewer than 500 attendees and were relatively simple to plan and execute, and for which cancellation would be less impactful in the event of changes in pandemic-related public health guidance. A tentative calendar of city-hosted community events in 2022-23 is included with this report in Attachment A.

Key considerations
Staff seeks policy direction from City Council related to city-hosted community events and observances for the following key considerations:

1. City-hosted events based on holidays of religious origin. Provide policy direction to staff regarding the City’s role as a local government agency in hosting, organizing, and using public funds toward community events based on holidays of religious origin, such as events based on the Christmas and Easter holidays.

2. Inclusion and belonging for all Menlo Park residents. Direct staff to use public resources to create events and experiences that are inclusive and foster a sense of belonging for all community members of every background, age, ability, income, religious belief or lack thereof, sexual orientation, and other lived experiences and characteristics that contribute to a vibrant and accepting community.

Holiday tree-lighting
Christmas is a major Christian religious holiday commemorating the birth of Jesus Christ. A national holiday with a long tradition of nationwide observances in the United States, Christmas also is the centerpiece of the busiest retail shopping season of the year. Among the most well-known symbols of the Christmas holiday is the Christmas tree, typically an evergreen tree adorned with lights and other decorations that often includes a star at the apex of the tree symbolizing the Star of Bethlehem, or an angel to symbolize the angels mentioned in the accounts of the Nativity of Jesus. While the Christmas tree as a symbol has evolved in the United States to include some secular connotations, particularly in commercial spheres, it is widely known and recognized to be a symbol of the Christian religious holiday.

The City of Menlo Park has a long-standing annual tradition of adorning a large tree in Fremont Park with decorative lights during the Christmas holiday season, and in recent years also began hanging lights on a large tree at the corner of Newbridge Street and Willow Road. Additionally, the City traditionally has organized and hosted a community event, typically in the first week of December, to celebrate the lighting of the Fremont Park tree, inaugurate the holiday season, and encourage attendees to patronize Menlo Park businesses for their holiday shopping, dining, services and entertainment.

Page F-1.2
Staff Report #: 22-188-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org Some community members have expressed the view that the event’s emphasis on a traditionally Christian religious symbol – a Christmas tree – is not inclusive to people of faiths other than Christianity or who do not participate in organized religion. Some community members have expressed that the event’s focus on Christian symbolism can engender feelings of exclusion from a community event, as they do not feel that their faith or belief system is represented. Additionally, the use of taxpayer-funded public resources to display a traditionally Christian religious symbol in a public space can be seen by some as inconsistent with foundational principles of American secular governance and the separation of church and state.

The holiday tree lighting is a widely cherished local tradition in Menlo Park, and is by no means unique to our community. Governments at every level have and continue to display Christmas trees in public spaces every year, including at the seat of the federal executive branch, The White House. Typically, governmentsponsored displays tend to focus on the more secular aspects of the Christmas holiday, such as shopping, feasting, spending time with family and friends, and gift-giving and de-emphasize its more overtly religious aspects. Many governments are careful to also recognize the holidays and observances of other belief systems that occur around the same time of the year as Christmas, for example Hanukkah, Kwanzaa and winter solstice.

Egg Hunt event
Easter is a major Christian holiday that commemorates the biblical resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, as described in the New Testament of the Christian Bible. Like Christmas, the Easter holiday has a long tradition of observances in the United States, and it too has become secularized in popular culture to some degree. One of the best-known symbols of this holiday is the Easter egg, which in the Christian religion is associated with Christ's biblical crucifixion and resurrection, and symbolizes the biblical tomb from which Christ emerged. The Easter egg has been popularized in secular American culture through the tradition of the children’s Easter egg hunt, which continues to be widely practiced in both private and public settings, including with an annual children’s Egg Hunt event in Menlo Park. Considerations about the underlying religious connotations of this City-hosted event are similar to those around the holiday tree lighting.

Recommendations for events based on holidays of religious origin For the above reasons, staff recommends the City balance local tradition with inclusion and belonging for all residents when hosting events based on holidays of religious origin, as follows:

1. Light Up the Season holiday tree lighting. Focus this event on inclusion for all Menlo Park residents of all faiths and belief systems, including residents who do not participate in organized religion. Continue the longstanding tradition of lighting trees in public spaces at Fremont Park and the Willow/Newbridge intersection to signal the official start of the holiday shopping and celebratory season. Continue to organize and host a community event in Fremont Park to inaugurate the season and ceremonially illuminate the tree. Focus the Fremont Park event on encouraging residents to patronize local businesses to stimulate the local economy and aid small businesses’ pandemic recovery efforts during the holidays and year-round. In addition to the tree lighting, staff recommends adding a new feature in the event program for 2022 in which Menlo Park school children from diverse faiths and belief systems share on stage what the holiday season means to them and the many diverse ways Menlo Park families celebrate the season.

2. Egg Hunt. Continue the longstanding tradition of inviting local children and families to engage in the annual springtime activity of hunting for eggs. Focus this event on inclusion for all Menlo Park residents of all faiths and belief systems by incorporating and/or sharing popular elements of spring renewal holidays and celebrations found in diverse cultures around the world, such as Passover, Holi, Ramadan, and vernal equinox. Staff has developed a partnership with San Mateo County Parks to host the 2023 Egg Hunt as well as the 2022 Halloween festival at Flood Park, to leverage the benefits of its 21 acres of Page F-1.3
Staff Report #: 22-188-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org parkland featuring mature native Oak and Bay trees, festival-ready spaces and amenities, ample free parking, and its location in Menlo Park near the US-101 bicycle and pedestrian overcrossing.

Additional considerations for City-hosted events
Informed by previous direction received from City Council and with input from the Parks and Recreation Commission, the Library Commission, and other stakeholders, staff is planning to incorporate the following additional considerations into city-hosted events in 2022-23. Staff seeks City Council’s feedback on these considerations as well as any other elements that City Council desires to incorporate into City-hosted events. The following considerations are numbered for convenience only, and are in no particular order or priority:

1. Leverage existing and new partnerships to deliver community events. Potential partners include business associations such as the Chamber of Commerce, service clubs such as Rotary, Lions and Kiwanis, neighborhood advocacy groups such as Belle Haven Action, local agencies such as Menlo Fire and school districts, and community-based organizations and nonprofits.

2. Establish criteria for event partnerships, including roles and responsibilities, cost sharing, staff and financial support, desired goal and outcomes for community events, for example: economic development, small business support, showcasing Menlo Park’s attributes, community action and volunteerism, and community pride and spirit.

3. Set clear goals and guidelines for sponsors of community events, including criteria for sponsor recognitions and the process for evaluating sponsorship offers.

4. Evaluate the cost-benefit of mass gatherings such as parades and festivals that carry increased risk and involve substantial investment of city resources in the form of staff capacity, public safety and public works resources, and financial outlay.

5. Align event production with recent revisions to the municipal code related to the special events ordinance, film permits ordinance, and parks and recreation ordinance. One potential example of this consideration is a community event for which an external partner is serving as the lead event organizer in partnership with the City or at the City’s request: working with the external partner early in the event planning process to establish clear roles and responsibilities and identify which aspects of the ordinances and/or permit requirements may apply to the event.

Next steps
Staff will incorporate City Council’s feedback and direction into the planning process for city-hosted events, and will report back to City Council for additional direction and potential budget authorizations, if needed, in the context of the midyear budget review tentatively in January/February 2023.

Impact on City Resources
A summary of the estimated impacts to City resources of City-hosted events in 2022-23 is in Attachment A.

City-hosted events and observances typically require substantial outlays of public resources in the form of staff time/effort and out-of-pocket expenditures. Estimated total out-of-pocket expenditures for city-hosted events in fiscal year 2022-23 are $143,000, which includes an estimated $55,000 to install holiday lights on large trees in Fremont Park and at the corner of Newbridge/Willow. Estimated total staff time and effort needed to produce city-hosted events in fiscal year 2022-23 is approximately 600-800 staff hours. City Council’s adopted fiscal year 2022-23 operating budget includes sufficient resources allocated to support these costs.

Environmental Review
This action is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines §§ 15378 and 15061(b)(3) as it will not result in any direct or indirect physical change in the Page F-1.4
Staff Report #: 22-188-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org Environment.

Public Notice
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with the agenda items being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

Attachments
A. Tentative calendar of city-hosted community events in 2022-23 Report prepared by:

Natalya Jones, Library and Community Services Supervisor Sean Reinhart, Library and Community Services Director
Page F-1.5
FY 2022-23 CITY-SPONSORED EVENTS - PARTIAL TENTATIVE CALENDAR ** All dates and event listings are tentative and subject to change ** List does not include:
• Small scale programs routinely hosted by senior center, library, childcare centers, and other City divisions. • Events hosted by third parties (for example: Bon Marche, Wine Walk, Off the Grid, etc.) 2022
Date
(tentative) Community event Proposed location/s
Estimated
staff
time/effort*
Estimated City
expenditures
(not including
staff costs)
Estimated
number of
attendees
Jul 13 Summer Concert #1 Fremont Park low $5,500 280
Jul 20 Summer Concert #2 Fremont Park low $5,500 180
Jul 27 Summer Concert #3 Fremont Park low $5,500 150
Aug 3 Summer Concert #4 Fremont Park low $5,500 230
Aug 10 Summer Concert #5 Fremont Park low $5,500 250
Aug 17 Summer Concert #6 Fremont Park low $5,500 500
Aug 19 Summer Concert #7 Belle Haven School Field low $5,500 130 Aug 26 Summer Concert #8 Belle Haven School Field low $5,500 110 Sep 24 Belle Haven resource fair Belle Haven School Field high $5,500 400 Oct 30 Halloween celebration Flood Park (in partnership with San Mateo County Parks) high $7,500 600 Nov TBD Tree light installation Fremont Park + Newbridge/Willow low $55,000 - Dec 2 Light up the Season event Fremont Park high $7,500 600 2023
Jan 21 Winter movie M-A Performing Arts Center low $500 100 Feb 25 Winter movie M-A Performing Arts Center low $500 100 Feb 2023 Black History Month celebration Burgess Park + Belle Haven School Field medium $2,500 250 Feb TBD Youth Poetry Contest City Council Chambers medium $500 200 Mar 25 Summer Camp resource fair Burgess Park + Belle Haven School Field medium $1,000 150 Apr 8 Egg Hunt Flood Park (in partnership with San Mateo County Parks) very high $7,500 800 May TBD Youth Poster Exhibition Main Library + Belle Haven Branch medium $500 100 Jun 17 Juneteenth celebration Belle Haven School Field medium $3,000 250 July 4 Independence Day parade Santa Cruz Ave very high $7,500 1,000+ TBD MPCC grand opening MPCC + Kelly Park very high TBD 800 TOTAL FY 2022-23 $143,000
* Staff time to plan/execute events is estimated as follows: Low = 1-20 total hours staff time. Medium = 21-40 hours. High = 41-60 hours. Very high = 61+ hours.

Page F-1.6 ATTACHMENT A
City Manager's Office

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org

STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 9/20/2022
Staff Report Number: 22-177-CC
Consent Calendar: Adopt a resolution to continue conducting the City’s Council and advisory body meetings
remotely due to health and safety concerns for the
public and to authorize the use of hybrid meetings
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution (Attachment A) to continue conducting the City’s Council and advisory body meetings remotely due to health and safety concerns for the public and to authorize the use of hybrid meetings and direct staff to begin the process of bringing advisory body meetings to a hybrid platform.

Policy Issues
Assembly Bill 361 (AB 361) was signed into law September 16, 2021 allowing cities to continue holding virtual meetings during any emergency proclaimed by the governor. AB 361 sunsets January 1, 2024. The City Council would need to declare every 30 days that the City’s legislative bodies must continue to meet remotely in order to ensure the health and safety of the public.

Background
The California Legislature approved AB 361, which was signed by the governor September 16, 2021 for signature. The bill allows local legislative bodies to continue to meet remotely through January 1, 2024. A local agency will be allowed to continue to meet remotely when:
• The local agency holds a meeting during a declared state of emergency • State or local health officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing • Legislative bodies declare the need to meet remotely due to present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees
The City meets the requirements to continue holding meetings remotely in order to ensure the health and safety of the public:
• The City is still under a local state of emergency
• County Health urges that all individuals in public spaces maintain social distancing and wear masks In March 2020, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, all advisory body meetings were canceled until June 2020.

Since that time, all meetings have been conducted virtually. On August 23, the City Council requested that staff begin the process of bringing advisory body meetings to a hybrid platform.

Staff has connected with advisory body members to ensure that current meeting start times and days will work for in-person and hybrid meetings. Staff has also begun to identify the needs to conduct advisory body meetings on a hybrid platform and will return to the City Council in October with an implementation AGENDA ITEM G-1 Page G-1.1
Staff Report #: 22-177-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org schedule.

Analysis
The City is still under a local state of emergency and the emergency findings required under AB 361 are still in effect. San Mateo County is still in the High/Red COVID-19 Community Level category and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends the use of masks indoors in public. The resolution authorizes the use of hybrid meetings, whereby City Councilmembers, participants, and staff may choose to attend either remotely or in person.

Although the City has returned to in-person meetings, due to the prevalence of BA strains of the SARSCoV-2 virus overtaking other variants in San Mateo County, the City Council finds that reducing the number of persons present in City Council chambers is necessary to reduce imminent health risks associated with large groups and/or members of varying households gathering indoors.

Impact on City Resources
There is no impact on City resources.

Environmental Review
This action is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines §§ 15378 and 15061(b)(3) as it is an organizational structure change that will not result in any direct or indirect physical change in the environment.

Public Notice
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with the agenda items being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

Attachments
A. Resolution
Report prepared by:

Judi A. Herren, Assistant to the City Manager/City Clerk Page G-1.2
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MENLO PARK AND

ON BEHALF OF COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES CREATED BY THE CITY

COUNCIL PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54952(b) AUTHORIZING TELECONFERENCE MEETINGS IN COMPLIANCE WITH AB 361 (GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54953(e)) TO CONTINUE TO

ALLOW MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO SAFELY PARTICIPATE IN LOCAL

GOVERNMENT MEETINGS
WHEREAS, the City Council is committed to ensuring public access to observe and participate in local government meetings; and
WHEREAS, all meetings of the City Council and other legislative bodies created pursuant to Government Code Section 54952(b) are open and public, as required by the Ralph M. Brown Act, so that any member of the public may participate in local government meetings; and WHEREAS, the AB 361, codified at Government Code section 54953(e), makes provisions for remote teleconferencing participation in local government meetings, without compliance with the requirements of 54953(b)(3), during a Governor-proclaimed state of emergency and if the local legislative body determines, by majority vote, that as a result of the emergency, meeting solely in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees; and WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom proclaimed a State of Emergency due to the outbreak of respiratory illness due to a novel coronavirus (now known as COVID-19) and that State of Emergency is still in effect in the State of California; and WHEREAS, on March 11, 2020 the City Council proclaimed the existence of a local state of emergency within the City, pursuant to Section 8625 of the California Emergency Services Act in response to the COVID-19 pandemic; and
WHEREAS, COVID-19 continues to threaten the health and lives of City residents; and WHEREAS, the SARS-CoV-2 Delta and Omicron Variants are highly transmissible in indoor settings; and
WHEREAS, the Omicron subvariants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is overtaking other variants in San Mateo County; and
WHEREAS, according to data from the County’s Health Administrator and County website, the County is averaging approximately 14 new cases per 100,000 of COVID-19 per day; and WHEREAS, although the City has returned to in-person meetings, due to the prevalence of BA strains of the SARS-CoV-2 virus overtaking other variants in San Mateo County, the City Council finds that reducing the number of persons present in City Council chambers is necessary to reduce imminent health risks associated with large groups and/or members of varying households gathering indoors; and
WHEREAS, the State of California and the City of Menlo Park continue to follow safety measures in response to COVID-19 as ordered or recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), California Department of Public Health (DPH), and/or County of Page G-1.3 ATTACHMENT A
Resolution No. XXXX

San Mateo, as applicable, including facial coverings when required; and based upon that guidance, in-person attendance indoors at public meetings continues to present a health risk for certain segments of the population, necessitating the need to reduce the number of in-person meeting attendees; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, acting as a legislative body pursuant to Government Code section 54952(a) and for the benefit of the commissions, committees and other bodies that were created by the City Council pursuant to Government Code section 54952(b) (collectively referred to as “Legislative Bodies”), finds that the current conditions meet the circumstances set forth in Government Code section 54953(e)(3) to allow Legislative Bodies to continue to use teleconferencing to hold open and public meetings if the Legislative Bodies comply with the requirements set forth in Government Code section 54953(e)(2) to ensure the public can safely participate in and observe local government meetings.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Menlo Park that the City Council does hereby:

1. Find that current conditions authorize teleconference public meetings of Legislative Bodies.

Based on the California Governor’s continued declaration of a State of Emergency and current conditions, the City Council finds that meeting in person, without the option for certain populations and persons to participate remotely, would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees. The City Council does therefore find that Legislative Bodies and members of Legislative Bodies of the City may elect to use teleconferencing to hold public meetings in accordance with Government Code section 54953(e)(2) to ensure members of the public have continued access to safely observe and participate in local government meetings.

2. Authorize Legislative Bodies to conduct teleconference meetings. The Legislative Bodies are hereby authorized to take all actions necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of this Resolution, including conducting open and public meetings in accordance with Government Code section 54953(e)(2) and other applicable provisions of the Brown Act.

3. Authorize Legislative Bodies to conduct hybrid meetings. The Legislative Bodies are hereby further authorized to conduct meetings in a “hybrid” format, where both members of the Body may elect to be present in person, utilizing appropriate distancing and masking practices, or participate by teleconferencing technology. Such meetings of the Legislative Bodies that occur using teleconferencing technology will provide an opportunity for any and all members of the public who wish to address Legislative Bodies and will otherwise occur in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of parties and the members of the public attending the meeting via teleconferencing.
//
//
//
//
//
//
Page G-1.4
Resolution No. XXXX

I, Judi A. Herren, City Clerk of Menlo Park, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing City Council Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted at a meeting by said City Council on the twentieth day of September, 2022, by the following votes:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Official Seal of said City on this __ day of September, 2022.

Judi A. Herren, City Clerk
Page G-1.5
City Manager's Office

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org

STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 9/20/2022
Staff Report Number: 22-176-CC
Consent Calendar: Adopt a resolution updating the City’s conflict of interest code
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution (Attachment A) updating the City’s conflict of interest code.

Policy Issues
The proposed action is consistent with City policy.

Background
The Political Reform Act requires every local government agency to review its conflict of interest code biennially. A conflict of interest code tells public officials, governmental employees, and consultants what financial interests they must disclose on their Statement of Economic Interests (Form 700.) Menlo Park’s conflict of interest code requires disclosure of financial interests of certain employees, consultants and members of boards and commissions if these persons are likely to be involved in decision-making that could affect their own financial interests.

All public officials must comply with the State’s general conflict of interest laws by abstaining from influencing or making decisions that would affect their own financial interests. State law requires that these public officials disclose economic interests that could be impacted by the officials’ decisions. Whether the official is required to disclose their economic interest(s) is determined by their position being listed in either Government Code Section 87200 or the local agency’s conflict of interest code. Each employee who holds a position designated in Section 87200 or the City’s conflict of interest code must disclose specified types of financial interests in a report, Form 700, that is filed annually with the city clerk. The City’s local conflict of interest code does not include the City Council, Planning Commission, city manager, city attorney, treasurer or administrative services director, because these positions are subject to Form 700 filing requirements pursuant to Government Code Section 87200. The Independent Redistricting Commission, Complete Streets Commission, and Housing Commission are currently included in the City’s local conflict of interest code.

Analysis
Following the City Council’s latest updates to the Menlo Park Municipal Code, the City Council directed staff to add the following commissions to the conflict of interest code:
• Complete Streets Commission
• Housing Commission
• Independent Redistricting Commission (Commissioners and Alternate Commissioners) AGENDA ITEM G-2 Page G-2.1
Staff Report #: 22-176-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org The City Council last amended the Menlo Park conflict of interest code December 7, 2021, by Resolution No. 6688. State law requires every local governmental agency to periodically review its conflict of interest code to determine whether it is accurate and up-to-date.

The proposed amendments to the list of designated positions attached to the resolution include additions, deletions and renaming of positions in order to align with the City’s current job classifications and duties.

Impact on City Resources
There is no impact on City resources.

Environmental Review
This action is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines §§ 15378 and 15061(b)(3) as it is an organizational structure change that will not result in any direct or indirect physical change in the environment.

Public Notice
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with the agenda items being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

Attachments
A. Resolution
Report prepared by:

Judi A. Herren, Assistant to the City Manager/City Clerk Page G-2.2
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MENLO PARK AMENDING THE CITY’S CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE FOR DESIGNATED

EMPLOYEES, CONSULTANTS, BOARDS, ADVISORY BODIES, AND

COMMISSIONS OF THE CITY OF MENLO PARK
WHEREAS, provisions of the Political Reform Act require local agencies to adopt and promulgate conflict of interest codes; and
WHEREAS, the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) has adopted a regulation, Title 2, Division 6, California Code of Regulations section 18730, which contains the terms of a model conflict of interest code which meets the requirements of the Political Reform Act; and WHEREAS, Title 2 California Code of Regulations section 18730 has been incorporated by reference in the City’s Conflict of Interest Code; and
WHEREAS, the City’s Conflict of Interest Code also includes, Exhibit A – 2022 Conflict of Interest Code detailing the designated positions and disclosure categories; and WHEREAS, said Exhibit contains the listing of designated positions and disclosure categories which have been reviewed, and this review has disclosed that they should be amended to reflect current conditions; and
WHEREAS, the City of Menlo Park has previously adopted Resolution No. 6688, adopting a conflict of interest code for various City employees, consultants, boards, advisory bodies, and commissions.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the terms of Title 2 California Code of Regulations Section 18730 and any amendments to it duly adopted by the FPPC shall, along with Exhibit A – 2022 Conflict of Interest Code for the City of Menlo Park, which are attached hereto incorporated herein by reference, in which members, employees, and consultants are designated and disclosure categories are set forth, constitute the Conflict of Interest Code of the City of Menlo Park; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all designated members, employees, and consultants of the City of Menlo Park set forth on Exhibit A –2022 Conflict of Interest Code shall file statements of economic interest with the City Clerk of the City of Menlo Park; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Resolution No. 6688 is repealed by the adoption of this resolution, which shall control over prior versions.
//
//
//
//
//
ATTACHMENT A Page G-2.3
I, Judi A. Herren, City Clerk of Menlo Park, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing City Council Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted at a meeting by said City Council on the twentieth day of September, 2022, by the following votes:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Official Seal of said City on this __ day of September, 2022.

Judi A. Herren, City Clerk
Resolution No. XXXX

APPENDIX
CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE – 2021 2022 UPDATE

DESIGNATED POSITIONS
AND DISCLOSURE OBLIGATIONS1
PROPOSED ADOPTION MARCH 23, 2021SEPTEMBER 20, 2022
Acting/Assistant City Attorney
Advisory bodies related to land use, real property, and housing element Assistant Administrative Services Director
Assistant City Manager
Assistant Community Development Director
Assistant Community Services Director
Assistant Library and Community Services Director
Assistant Library Services Director
Assistant Public Works Director
Assistant Public Works Director – Engineering
Assistant Public Works Director – Maintenance
Assistant Public Works Director – Transportation
Assistant to the City Manager
Associate Planner
Business Manager
Chief Water Operator
City Arborist
City Clerk
Community Development Director
Consultant/Contract employees
Contract Planner
Deputy City Clerk
Deputy City Manager
Deputy Community Development Director – Housing
Economic Development Manager
Engineering Services Manager/City Engineer
Finance and Budget Manager
Finance Director
Housing and Economic Development Manager
Housing Manager
Human Resources Director
Human Resources Manager
Human Resources Technician I
Human Resources Technician II
Information Technology Manager
Internal Services Manager
Library and Community Services Director
Library and Community Services Supervisor
Library Services Manager
Management Analyst II
Network Administrator
Permit Manager

1 Positions covered under Government Code §87200 (City Council, Planning Commission, City Manager, City Attorney, and Administrative Services Director) are not covered by the local Conflict of Interest Code.

EXHIBIT A Resolution No. XXXX

Planning Manager
Police Chief
Police Commander
Principal Planner
Public Engagement Manager
Public Works Director
Public Works Superintendent
Public Works Supervisor – Facilities
Public Works Supervisor – Fleet
Public Works Supervisor – Parks
Public Works Supervisor – Streets
Public Works Supervisor – Trees
Recreation Coordinator
Recreation Supervisor
Revenue and Claims Manager
Senior Civil Engineer
Senior GIS Analyst
Senior Human Resources Technician
Senior Management Analyst
Senior Planner
Senior Project Manager
Senior Transportation Engineer
Senior Transportation Planner
Sustainability Manager
Transportation Consultant
Transportation Director
Transportation Manager
Consultants:

An individual is a consultant if either of the following apply:

1. the person serves in a staff capacity with the agency and in that capacity performs the same or substantially all the same duties for the agency that would otherwise be performed by a person holding a position specified or that should be specified in the City’s Conflict of Interest Code; or

2. the person makes a governmental decision listed in 2 CCR Section 19701(a)(2).

The city manager and/or the city attorney may determine in writing that a particular consultant is hired to perform a range of duties that are limited in scope and thus is not required to comply with the disclosure obligations in the conflict of interest code. Such written determination shall include a description of the consultant’s duties and, based upon that description, a statement of the extent of disclosure requirements. The city manager’s and/or the city attorney’s determination is a public record and shall be retained for public inspection in the same manner and location as this conflict of interest code.

Disclosure obligations:

All designated employees and consultants required to file under the City of Menlo Park conflict of interest code must disclose in the following categories as defined by the FPPC:
• Investments (stocks, bonds and other interests)
• Investments, income and assets of business entities/trust Resolution No. XXXX

• Interests in real property
• Income, loans and business positions (Income other than gifts and travel payments) • Income – gifts
• Travel payments, advances and reimbursements
Resolution No. XXXX

Public Works

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org

STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 9/20/2022
Staff Report Number: 22-178-CC
Consent Calendar: Authorize the city manager to enter into an agreement with the City of Redwood City for annual
maintenance of Atherton Channel
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the city manager to enter into a three-year agreement (Attachment A), until October 31, 2025, with the City of Redwood City for annual maintenance of Atherton Channel (Channel.)
Policy Issues
This action is consistent with City policy and Municipal Code 12.42.14(3), which contemplates alterations to stream channels to accommodate floodwaters and reduce losses from floods. The agreement amount exceeds the city manager’s authority and requires City Council approval.

Background
Atherton Channel (Channel) drains a six-square mile watershed covering Atherton, portions of unincorporated San Mateo County, Redwood City and Menlo Park. The eastern section of the Channel runs parallel to Haven Avenue for approximately 1,000 feet between U.S. Highway 101 and the Bayfront Canal (Canal.) The Channel and Canal empty into Flood Slough through a tide gate control structure. This structure prevents San Francisco Bay water from flowing back into the Canal during high tides; it is operated and maintained by the City of Redwood City. With this structure in place, the water can only flow one direction, into San Francisco Bay.

The tide gates close automatically when tide levels in the Bay are high, which prevents the City’s storm water flow from emptying into Flood Slough. The Bayfront Canal and Atherton Channel Flood Protection and Ecosystem Restoration Project was meant to protect the area from the 100-year frequency of the storm event. In October 2017, Redwood City, Menlo Park, Atherton and the County (OneShoreline) entered into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) that established shared funding responsibilities for the design, environmental documentation, and land access agreements of a project to reduce the frequency and impacts of flooding. Work at the entrance to Bedwell Bayfront Park began in June 2021, and the Project’s major construction activities concluded in January. Construction of the Bayfront Canal and Atherton Channel Flood Protection and Ecosystem Restoration Project is nearing completion. Only the final punch list and site cleanup tasks remain.

Even with the completion of the project, regular maintenance of the Atherton Channel is needed to maintain the cross-sectional capacity of the Channel and minimize the effect of repetitive flooding events. The City has an annual maintenance program to remove debris and vegetation. The work is performed within a portion of the Channel between U.S. Highway 101 and Haven Avenue bridge (Attachment B.) Cleaning operations occur annually in September and October before the rainy season.

AGENDA ITEM G-3 Page G-3.1
Staff Report #: 22-178-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org Analysis
Since 2002, the City has entered into contracts with the City of Redwood City to perform maintenance cleaning operations for the Channel. Redwood City currently maintains the Canal and has the equipment and experience necessary to maintain the Channel as well. In the past, Redwood City has completed the maintenance work in a timely, safe, and efficient manner that minimizes impacts to automotive and pedestrian traffic.

Redwood City staff has performed the maintenance of the Channel outside of normal working hours and duties. The labor hourly rate for the three-year agreement is $204.46, which represents Redwood City’s fully burdened rate. This hourly rate has increased $15.46 from the three-year agreement executed in 2019.

Since maintenance of the Channel began in 2002, City staff has occasionally requested quotes from private contractors to ensure the City receives fair pricing. The bids received have typically been more than twice the Redwood City cost. Staff recommends entering into a three-year agreement with Redwood City to continue performing maintenance cleaning operations on the Channel.

Impact on City Resources
Maximum annual maintenance costs are delineated in the table below and totals $150,000 over the next three-years, funded from the general fund. The adopted fiscal year 2022-23 budget includes sufficient funds for the first year. Funding for future years would be included in the fiscal year 2023-24 and fiscal year 2024- 25 budgets.

Table 1: Atherton Channel cleaning services
Fiscal year Annual cost
2022-23 $50,000
2023-24 $50,000
2024-25 $50,000
Total $150,000
Environmental Review
Department of Fish and Wildlife, acting as a lead agency, on its letter dated September 24, 2015 to the City, determined the project is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and filed a notice of exemption.

Public Notice
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with the agenda items being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

Attachments
A. City of Redwood City – draft agreement and scope of work B. Site plan-Atherton Channel maintenance
Page G-3.2
Staff Report #: 22-178-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org Report prepared by:

Esther Jung, Associate Civil Engineer
Fariborz Heydari, Senior Civil Engineer
Reviewed by:

Tanisha Werner, Assistant Public Works Director
Page G-3.3
REV: 09-14-2022 EI

AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES

CITY OF REDWOOD CITY
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of the _____ day of __________________, 2022 (the “Effective Date”), by and between the CITY OF MENLO PARK, a municipal corporation of the State of California (“Menlo Park”), and CITY OF REDWOOD CITY a charter city and municipal corporation of the State of California. (“Redwood City”).

RECITALS
A. Menlo Park requires annual maintenance services for the Atherton Channel located in Menlo Park.

B. Redwood City has the necessary experience in providing such services.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of these recitals and the mutual covenants contained herein, the Parties agree as follows:

1. Scope of Work. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, Redwood City shall provide those services described in Exhibit A, along with Exhibit A-1, the Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAA) between the State of California and Menlo Park and Exhibit A-2, the site plan, which documents are incorporated herein by reference. In summary, the scope of services includes but is not limited to vegetation and trash and debris removal from the channel and banks of the Atherton Channel located in Menlo Park.

2. Term. Unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 17, the term of this Agreement will begin on the Effective Date and will end October 31, 2025.

3. Schedule. Redwood City will adhere to the schedule set forth in Exhibit “A”, provided, that Menlo Park, in its discretion, may grant reasonable extensions.

4. Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this Agreement.

5. Compensation. Menlo Park will pay to Redwood City a not-to-exceed amount of One Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($150,000) for the completion of all the work and services described herein, which sum will include all costs or expenses incurred by Redwood City, payable as set forth in Exhibit “A”.

5.1 Contractor must submit applications for payment that contain the following:

5.1.1 A clear, detailed invoice reflecting Services for which Redwood City is billing Menlo Park;
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 1 of 40)
ATTACHMENT A Page G-3.4
REV: 09-14-2022 EI

5.1.2 A summary sheet showing hourly rates (if applicable);

5.1.3 Number of hours worked;

5.1.4 Any backup documentation reasonably necessary to substantiate the preceding items; and

5.1.5 Any changes to the anticipated work schedule.

5.2. The payment made to Redwood City pursuant to the Agreement will be the full and complete compensation to which Redwood City is entitled. Menlo Park will not make any federal or state tax withholdings on behalf of Redwood City or its officers, agents, employees, contractors, or subcontractors (collectively, “Redwood City Personnel”). Menlo Park will not be required to pay any workers' compensation insurance or unemployment contributions on behalf of Redwood City or any Redwood City Personnel.

6. Status of Redwood City. Redwood City will perform the Services as an independent contractor and not as an employee of Menlo Park. The persons used by Redwood City to provide services under this Agreement will not be considered employees of Menlo Park for any purposes.

7. Labor Code Prevailing Wage. To the extent required by law, Redwood City will comply with the requirements of the California Labor Code including but not limited to hours of labor, nondiscrimination, payroll records, apprentices, workers’ compensation and prevailing wages. When prevailing wage rules are applicable, the following provisions apply:

7.1. No less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for holidays and overtime work, for each craft, classification or type of worker needed to execute the Services under this Agreement will be paid to all workers, laborers and mechanics employed in the execution of the Services by the Redwood City or any subcontractor doing or contracting to do any part of the Services.

7.2. The appropriate determination of the Director of the California Department of Industrial Relations will be filed with and available for inspection at Menlo Park offices.

7.3. Redwood City will post, at each job site, a copy of the prevailing rate of per diem wages.

7.4. The Redwood City will forfeit fifty dollars ($50.00) for each calendar day or portion thereof for each worker paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for any public work done under the Agreement by it or by any subcontractor under Redwood City.

ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 2 of 40)
Page G-3.5
REV: 09-14-2022 EI

8. Subcontracting. Redwood City will not subcontract any portion of the Services without prior written approval of the City Manager or their designee.

9. Other Contractors. Menlo Park reserves the right to employ other contractors in connection with the Services.

10. Indemnification.

Redwood City shall defend, hold harmless, and indemnify Menlo Park and its officers, employees, agents, and servants from any and all claims, suits, or actions of every name, kind, and description brought by a third party which arise out of the terms and conditions of this Agreement and which result from the acts or omissions of Redwood City or its officers, employees, agents, and servants.

Menlo Park shall defend, save harmless, and indemnify Redwood City and its officers, employees, agents, and servants from any and all claims, suits, or actions of every name, kind, and description brought by a third party which arise out of the terms and conditions of this Agreement and which result from the acts or omissions of Menlo Park or its officers, employees, agents and servants.

The duty of each party to defend, hold harmless, and indemnify the other as set forth herein shall include the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code.

In the event of concurrent negligence (or intentional/reckless acts) of Redwood City or its officers, employees, agents and servants, on the one hand, and Menlo Park or its officers, employees, agents, and servants, on the other hand, then the liability for any and all claims for injuries or damage to persons and/or property which arise out of terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be apportioned according to the California theory of comparative fault.

11. Insurance. Redwood City is a government entity which is a member of a Bay Cities Joint Power Insurance Authority (BCJPIA) Accordingly, Redwood City will meet the following insurance standards or the substantial equivalent thereof: Redwood City will obtain and maintain for the duration of the Agreement and any and all amendments, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which may arise out of or in connection with performance of the Services by Redwood City or Redwood City’s agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. The insurance carrier is required to maintain an A.M. Best rating of not less than “A-:VII”.

11.1 Coverages and Limits. Redwood City, at its sole expense, will maintain the types of coverages and minimum limits indicated below, unless otherwise approved by City in writing. These minimum amounts of coverage will not constitute any limitations or cap on Redwood City's indemnification obligations under this Agreement.

ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 3 of 40)
Page G-3.6
REV: 09-14-2022 EI

11.1.1 Commercial General Liability Insurance. Redwood City will maintain occurrence based coverage with limits not less than $2,000,000 per occurrence. If the submitted policies contain aggregate limits, such limits will apply separately to the Services, project, or location that is the subject of this Agreement or the aggregate will be twice the required per occurrence limit. The Commercial General Liability insurance policy will be endorsed to name the Menlo Park, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers as additional insureds, and to state that the insurance will be primary and not contribute with any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the Menlo Park.

11.1.2 Business Automobile Liability Insurance. Redwood City will maintain coverage with limits not less than $1,000,000 per each accident for owned, hired and non-owned automobiles. For on-call services agreements, the Business Automobile Liability insurance policy will be endorsed to name the Menlo Park, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers as additional insureds, and to state that the insurance will be primary and not contribute with any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the Menlo Park.

11.1.3 Workers' Compensation Insurance. Redwood City will maintain coverage as required by the California Labor Code. The Workers’ Compensation policy will contain an endorsement stating that the insurer waives any right to subrogation against the Menlo Park, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers.

11.1.4 Employer's Liability Insurance. Redwood City will maintain coverage with limits not less than $1,000,000 per each accident for bodily injury or disease.

11.2. Notice of Cancellation. This insurance will be in force during the life of the Agreement and any extensions of it and will not be canceled without Redwood City providing thirty (30) days prior written notice to Menlo Park sent pursuant to the Notice provisions of this Agreement.

11.3 Providing Certificates of Insurance and Endorsements. Prior to Menlo Park’s execution of this Agreement, Redwood City will provide to Menlo Park certificates of insurance and above-referenced endorsements sufficient to satisfaction of Menlo Park’s Risk Manager. In no event will Redwood City commence any work or provide any Services under this Agreement until certificates of insurance and endorsements have been accepted by Menlo Park’s Risk Manager. Notwithstanding the above, both Parties will have the right to self-insure against any and all perils and/or liabilities against which it would otherwise be required to insure and will also have the right to effect any such insurance by means of so called “blanket” or “umbrella” policies of insurance.

ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 4 of 40)
Page G-3.7
REV: 09-14-2022 EI

11.4 Failure to Maintain Coverage. If Redwood City fails to comply with these insurance requirements, then Menlo Park will have the option to declare Redwood City in breach, or may purchase replacement insurance or pay the premiums that are due on existing policies in order to maintain the required coverages. Redwood City is responsible for any payments made by Menlo Park to obtain or maintain insurance and Menlo Park may collect these payments from Redwood City or deduct the amount paid from any sums due Redwood City under this Agreement.

11.5 Submission of Insurance Policies. Menlo Park reserves the right to require, at any time, complete copies of any or all required insurance policies and endorsements.

12. Documents. If applicable, Redwood City shall deliver to Menlo Park, on request of Menlo Park’s City Manager, copies of all original papers, documents and any other materials, in electronic or any other form, prepared by Redwood City pursuant to this Agreement.

13. Maintenance of Records. Redwood City will maintain complete and accurate records with respect to costs incurred under this Agreement. All records will be clearly identifiable. Redwood City will allow a representative of Menlo Park during normal business hours to examine, audit, and make transcripts or copies of records and any other documents created pursuant to this Agreement. Redwood City will allow Menlo Park to inspect of all work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to the Agreement for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment under this Agreement.

14. Notices. The name of the persons who are authorized to give written notices or to receive written notice on behalf of Menlo Park and on behalf of Redwood City under this Agreement.

For Menlo Park:

City of Menlo Park
Attention: City Manager
701 Laurel Street
Menlo Park, CA 94025
For Redwood City:

City of Redwood City Public Works
Services
Attention: Wastewater Superintendent
1400 Broadway Street
Redwood City, CA 94063

Except as otherwise stated, all notices provided under this Agreement must be in writing and delivered by regular and certified mail. Each party will notify the other immediately of any changes of address that would require any notice or delivery to be directed to another address.

15. General Compliance with Laws. Redwood City will keep fully informed of federal, state and local laws and ordinances and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by Redwood City, or in any way affect the performance of the Services by Redwood City. Redwood City will at all times observe and comply with these laws, ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 5 of 40)
Page G-3.8
REV: 09-14-2022 EI
ordinances, and regulations and will be responsible for the compliance of the Services with all applicable laws, ordinances and regulations.

16. Discrimination and Harassment Prohibited. Redwood City will comply with all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations prohibiting discrimination and harassment.

17. Termination.

17.1 Either party upon tendering thirty (30) days written notice to the other party may terminate this Agreement.

17.2 If Redwood City materially fails or refuses to perform any of the provisions of this Agreement, and if Redwood City does not cure the default within fifteen (15) days of the Menlo Park providing a written notice specifying the nature of the default, Menlo Park may terminate this Agreement immediately by giving written notice to Redwood City.

17.3 If Menlo Park materially fails or refuses to perform any of the provisions of this Agreement, and if Menlo Park does not cure the default within fifteen (15) days of Redwood City providing a written notice specifying the nature of the default, Redwood City may terminate this Agreement immediately by giving written notice to City.

17.4 Within ten (10) days of termination pursuant to this Section 17 or of the natural expiration of this Agreement, Redwood City will be entitled to payment on a pro rata basis for the services performed as of the date of termination, to the extent they were performed in accordance with this Agreement.

18. Jurisdiction and Venue. Any action at law or in equity brought by either of the Parties for the purpose of enforcing a right or rights provided for by this Agreement will be tried in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of San Mateo, State of California.

The Parties waive all provisions of law providing for a change of venue in these proceedings to any other county.

19. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement will be binding upon the Parties and their respective successors and assigns. Redwood City may not assign this Agreement, nor any part of it, nor any monies due or to become due under it without the prior written consent of Menlo Park, which Menlo Park may not unreasonably withhold.

20. Paragraph Headings. Headings in this Agreement are for convenience only and are not part of any provision in this Agreement. No heading will be construed to change the meaning of any provision.

21. Entire Agreement; Conflicts. This Agreement, together with any other written document referred to or contemplated by it, along with any purchase order or task order ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 6 of 40)
Page G-3.9
REV: 09-14-2022 EI
for this Agreement, embodies the entire Agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the subject matter of it. In case of conflict, the terms of the Agreement supersede any purchase order or task order and any other attachment or exhibit.

22. Amendments. This Agreement may only be amended, modified, waived or discharged in a writing signed by both Parties.

23. Authority. The individuals executing this Agreement and the instruments referenced in it on behalf of Redwood City each represent and warrant that they have the legal power, right and actual authority to bind Redwood City to the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

24. Electronic Signatures. If all Parties agree, electronic signatures may be used in place of original signatures on this Agreement. Each Party intends to be bound by the signatures on the electronic document, is aware that the other Parties will rely on the electronic signatures, and hereby waives any defenses to the enforcement of the terms of this Agreement based on the use of an electronic signature. After all Parties agree to the use of electronic signatures, all Parties must sign the document electronically. (Signature Page Follows)
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 7 of 40)
Page G-3.10
REV: 09-14-2022 EI
FOR CITY OF REDWOOD CITY:
______________________________
By: Melissa Stevenson Diaz, City
Manager
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Pamela Aguilar, City Clerk
_____________________________
Date:

FOR CITY OF MENLO PARK:
_____________________________
By: Justin Murphy, City Manager
ATTEST:
_________________________
Judi Herren, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________
Mona E. Ebrahimi, City Attorney
_____________________________
Date:

ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 8 of 40)
Page G-3.11
REV: 09-14-2022 EI
EXHIBIT “A”

SCOPE OF SERVICES AND FEE
Redwood City shall perform removal of debris, trash, vegetation (in-stream and on banks) and roots as part of the annual flood control maintenance of Atherton Channel (Channel) and in accordance with the requirements of the City of Menlo Park’s California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Streambed Alteration Agreement (SAA) (Exhibit A-1).

The following tasks shall be performed on an annual basis, by October 31 of each year:

A. Remove and dispose of trash and debris embedded within the Channel using hand tools and a clamshell bucket.

B. Tree and Vegetation Removal:
a. Remove living vegetation in the Channel and on the lower half of the creek banks using hand tools. Trees and other woody vegetation shall only be trimmed, not removed, to the extent necessary to allow a specific level of access and for specific types of equipment (e.g. crane, clamshell bucket) or to restore normal streamflow. b. Remove vegetation and mow levee slopes and top of bank using hand tools. c. Remove trees, shrubs, and emergent wetland plants from the Channel if they are below ordinary high water and are restricting the capacity of the Channel or are causing erosion.
d. Prune branches overhanging the Channel and impacting water flows. Branches in the lower third of any woody plant and less than three (3) inches in diameter may be trimmed.
e. Trim understory ground cover and vines (e.g., mugwort, blackberry, ferns) only as needed.
f. Cut off woody and herbaceous plants, fallen trees or trunks lodged in the bed or bank causing flow restriction at the bed or bank invert with small tools and remove with winch and cable. Root structures shall not be excavated or disturbed. No vegetation shall be removed by excavation or cutting off below the soil. g. No equipment shall be operated within the drip line of trees. Protective fencing shall be placed around the drip lines to prevent compaction of the root zone. No bulldozers, backhoes, or other heavy equipment shall be used to remove trees.

C. Remove and dispose of invasive, non-native plants using hand tools.

D. All personnel/work crew shall receive educational training on species that may be present at the site before being allowed to work on site. The training will be conducted by a qualified biological monitor or biologist under contract with Menlo Park.

E. Place spoils in areas where it could not enter the stream, riparian or wetland areas. To the extent possible, separate vegetation and recyclable materials.

F. Allow wildlife to leave the project site unharmed if encountered during maintenance activities.

G. Coordination of Work:

In order to satisfy specific conditions within the SAA, Menlo Park will utilize a biological services firm under separate contract. The general scope of work to be performed by the qualified biologists and biological monitors includes pre-construction bat surveys and reports, construction work area layout, education training, on-site biological construction monitoring and post-construction reporting. Redwood City will need to coordinate their schedule for performing the maintenance cleaning activities with the selected biological services firm to ensure conformance with all requirements in the SAA. This includes ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 9 of 40)
Page G-3.12
REV: 09-14-2022 EI
providing adequate notice and coordination to ensure availability of the biological services firm to perform a pre-construction bat survey within 30 days of starting on-site work, to layout the work area, and to perform education training and site monitoring during all on-site maintenance cleaning activities.

Protection of Channel:

Pursuant to the SAA, the following measures shall be taken to protect the Channel:

A. A clamshell bucket and hand tools shall be used to remove vegetation from the Channel.

B. No equipment shall be placed or operated in the Channel.

C. Mowing shall only occur on top of bank above ordinary high water level and shall not occur within the Channel or lower bank.

D. Staging and storage areas for equipment, materials, fuels, lubricants and solvents shall be located away from the wetted areas.

E. Any equipment or vehicles operated adjacent to the creek areas shall be checked and maintained daily to prevent leaks of materials into the water. Vehicles must be moved 150 feet away from the stream prior to refueling and lubrication.

F. All workers shall decontaminate waders, boots and other clothing that will come in direct contact with the water to prevent the spread of aquatic diseases. The decontamination of clothing and equipment shall comply with the methods included in the SAA - Avoidance and Minimization Measures Item 2.6 (Exhibit A-1). These methods are summarized below, and one or more of these methods shall be used:
a. All equipment shall be dried in an upland location following last aquatic use. The minimum drying time depends on the average daytime temperatures, at least 7 days of drying time for average daytime temperatures more than 80 °F and at least 30 days of drying time for average daytime temperatures less than 80 °F. b. Scalding water wash (at least 140 °F) with varying high and low pressure spray to dislodge pathogens and vegetation.
c. Freezing at a temperature less than 32 °F for more than 72 hours. d. Soaking in a hospital-grade disinfectant solution for at least two minutes.

Disinfected clothing and equipment shall be thoroughly rinsed in a water bath before entering the stream.

Repeat decontamination is required only if the equipment/clothing is removed from the site, used within a different waterbody, and returned to the project site.

Site Considerations
Staging and access for the project will be from the public right-of-way on Marsh Road and Haven Avenue, adjacent to the Channel. No equipment, with the exception of hand tools and clamshell bucket, shall be allowed within the Channel.

Due to site constraints, traffic control will be required. The City of Menlo Park shall provide traffic control devices (e.g. cones, barricades, warning signs, etc.) and other incidentals to control automobile traffic safety around the sites. The City of Menlo Park shall close the sidewalk next to the Channel and re-direct pedestrian traffic while work is in progress. Redwood City shall handle worksite safety and work equipment traffic control if it is required, which shall comply with all City of Menlo Park standards. Construction operations shall be conducted in such a manner to cause as little inconvenience to vehicle and pedestrian traffic as possible.

Redwood City shall follow all City of Menlo Park NPDES requirements and Best Management Practices (e.g. straw or fiber rolls, storm drain filters) to keep miscellaneous litter and trash out of ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 10 of 40)
Page G-3.13
REV: 09-14-2022 EI
the Channel and storm drains during work activities. Redwood City shall keep the work area and right-of-way clean of debris from project activities. After removal of spoils, Redwood City shall leave the area in as clean a condition as it was before the work.

Disposal of materials removed from the Channel and banks shall be arranged by the City of Menlo Park.

Redwood City shall provide access to toilet facilities for its workers. There are no public facilities near the work site.

Regulatory Provisions
The City of Menlo Park will provide Redwood City personnel with site-specific trainings necessary to perform work under the SAA. The City of Menlo Park will also arrange for any monitoring services (e.g. biological monitor) as required by the SAA.

Equipment
Redwood City shall provide the necessary equipment (e.g. hand tools and a ten-ton telescopic crane truck with a clamshell bucket) for the project. The City of Menlo Park shall provide five yard dump trucks for vegetation and debris removal from job site. However, in the event of an unforeseen equipment, failure such that the annual flood control maintenance cannot be completed prior to October 31 of that year, Redwood City shall notify City of Menlo Park, and at the discretion of the City of Menlo Park, there will be three alternatives to completing the project:
• The City of Menlo Park shall cover the cost of renting replacement equipment for Redwood City’s use, or
• The City of Menlo Park shall pay for all services that were provided by Redwood City, and the City of Menlo Park will assume responsibility for completing the remainder of the project through other means, or
• After Redwood City is able to assess the extent of the equipment failure and provide an estimated timeline for repair or replacement, City of Menlo Park shall seek an extension approval from California Department of Fish and Wildlife so that the project can be completed by Redwood City, given this timeline is agreeable with the needs of the City of Menlo Park.

Scheduling and Hours
The City of Menlo Park shall initiate scheduling with Redwood City each year. The City of Menlo Park shall provide Redwood City with as much advance notice as possible to arrange for personnel and equipment.

The period in which to conduct project activities shall follow the timeline specified in the SAA. The allowable working hours will be 9:00 AM to 3:00 PM on weekdays, 6:00 AM to 6:00 PM on weekends, except where otherwise specified by the City of Menlo Park. Project activities shall span between four (4) to six (6) working days each year, depending on site conditions. Working days are anticipated to be between ten (10) and twelve (12) hours in length.

2. Payment Terms
Redwood City shall provide the services outlined herein on an hourly basis not to exceed $150,000 for the length of the agreement, or an annual amount delineated in the table below.

Fees will be billed based on actual hours worked and equipment used per the labor rate schedule and equipment schedule delineated below.

ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 11 of 40)
Page G-3.14
REV: 09-14-2022 EI
Labor Rates
Classification Hourly Rate
Administrative Oversight $204.46
Lead PW Maintenance Worker $204.46
Equipment Operator $204.46
PW Maintenance Worker $204.46
Equipment Rates
Redwood City’s equipment will be billed according to the Caltrans Equipment Rental Rates and Labor Surcharge fee schedule for the time period in which work activities are performed. Caltrans rental rates are available online at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/construc/equipmnt.html.

Anticipated equipment include:
• (1) Clamshell bucket
• (1) 10 Ton Telescopic Crane
• (1) Utility Truck
• (4) Hedge/Brush Trimmers
Maximum Annual Not-to-Exceed Amount
Fiscal Year
Maximum Annual Not-toExceed Amount
2022-2023 $50,000
2023-2024 $50,000
2024-2025 $50,000
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 12 of 40)
Page G-3.15
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 13 of 40)
Page G-3.16
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 14 of 40)
Page G-3.17
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 15 of 40)
Page G-3.18
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 16 of 40)
Page G-3.19
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 17 of 40)
Page G-3.20
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 18 of 40)
Page G-3.21
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 19 of 40)
Page G-3.22
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 20 of 40)
Page G-3.23
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 21 of 40)
Page G-3.24
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 22 of 40)
Page G-3.25
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 23 of 40)
Page G-3.26
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 24 of 40)
Page G-3.27
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 25 of 40)
Page G-3.28
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 26 of 40)
Page G-3.29
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 27 of 40)
Page G-3.30
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 28 of 40)
Page G-3.31
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 29 of 40)
Page G-3.32
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 30 of 40)
Page G-3.33
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 31 of 40)
Page G-3.34
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 32 of 40)
Page G-3.35
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 33 of 40)
Page G-3.36
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 34 of 40)
Page G-3.37
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 35 of 40)
Page G-3.38
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 36 of 40)
Page G-3.39
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 37 of 40)
Page G-3.40
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 38 of 40)
Page G-3.41
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 39 of 40)
Page G-3.42
ATTY/AGR.2022.328/City of Redwood City (Page 40 of 40)
Page G-3.43
ATTACHMENT B Page G-3.44
Public Works

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org

STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 9/20/2022
Staff Report Number: 22-179-CC
Consent Calendar: Award a construction contract to Blue Flame Crew West, LLC for the Bedwell Bayfront Park landfill
leachate and gas collection systems improvement
project
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council award a $1,882,900 construction contract to Blue Flame Crew West, LLC (Attachment A) and approve contingency in the amount of $380,000 (held by the City) for the construction of the Bedwell Bayfront Park Landfill leachate and gas collection system improvements (Project.)
Policy Issues
The agreement is consistent with Goal LU-7 (land use) of the general plan land use element which is intended to “promote the implementation and maintenance of sustainable development, facilities and services to meet the needs of Menlo Park's residents, businesses, workers and visitors.” Background
Landfill history
The Bedwell Bayfront Park Landfill is a Class III non-hazardous solid waste management facility located at the north end of the City on San Francisco Bay at Bayfront Expressway and Marsh Road. The site is surrounded on three sides by the Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge. Originally referred to as the Marsh Road Landfill, San Mateo County first established solid waste operations at the site in 1957. In 1968, the City of Menlo Park took over the responsibility of the landfill until its closure in 1984. In 1982, the City began the development of Bedwell Bayfront Park on the 160-acre site, of which the landfill covers 155 acres.

The critical aspect of maintaining the closed landfill includes managing the gases that are produced as the waste decomposes (primarily methane) and the water that infiltrates the refuse (known as leachate.) The landfill typically generates about 127 million standard cubic feet of landfill gas a year. About 3.5 million gallons of leachate are extracted from the landfill and discharged to the sanitary sewer annually through systems and regulatory permitting.

The gas collection and control system was installed in two phases, in 1984 and 1987. Since its construction, the City has performed periodic maintenance on it.

Design of landfill improvements
On August 14, 2019, the city manager entered into a professional services agreement with Golder Associates, Inc. (Golder) to conduct the evaluation phase of the project for a cost not to exceed $56,300.

AGENDA ITEM G-4 Page G-4.1
Staff Report #: 22-179-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org Golder submitted their phase one evaluation report July 13, 2020. It concluded that the existing leachate collection and gas collection and control systems do not require major replacement or expansion of extraction capacity to meet current regulatory requirements since they have continued to comply with the current Water Board and Air District permits. However, both systems are in need of maintenance repairs and upgrades to improve long-term operability and to make park use safe, particularly on the public access trail system. On December 21, 2020 the Air District issued a Notice of Violation citing two gas collection and control system wells that had leaks exceeding allowable methane gas limits at a November 12, 2020 site inspection. Both wells were repaired within the five-day Air District requirement and were found to be in compliance on the follow-up December 21, 2020 site inspection. These well leaks verify the need to perform the system improvements recommended in the Golder report.

On January 12, 2021, the City Council approved an amendment of the agreement with Golder to proceed with the design of the BBP landfill leachate and gas collection systems improvements. Design work was completed in July 2022 and the project plans and specifications were advertised for bidding July 28, 2022.

Golder’s engineer’s estimate of the cost of construction of the proposed improvements was $1,227,000.

Analysis
Project bids were opened August 24, 2022. The bid results are shown in Table 1 below:

Table 1: Bid results
Bidder Construction estimate
Engineer’s estimate $1,227,000
Blue Flame Crew West, LLC $1,882,900
Innovative Construction Solutions $2,022,923
SCS Engineers $2,254,043
The low bid of $1,882,900 submitted by Blue Flame Crew West, LLC is about 53 percent higher than Golder’s engineer’s estimate of $1,227,000. This difference is likely due Golder’s estimate being prepared in April 2022 and since that time material costs for the thermoplastic piping, landfill gas well heads, and precast concrete structures that will be needed for the project have more than doubled in price due to supply chain limitations and fuel costs. These underlying cost increases have also impacted other overall construction costs included in the bid including mobilization, surveying, traffic control and waste management. The Blue Flame Crew low bid and the second low bid submitted by Innovative Construction Solutions are within 7 percent of each other, which indicates that the low bid is currently competitive for the current San Francisco Bay Area construction contracting market conditions.

Blue Fame Crew is currently a sub-contractor to the landfill’s maintenance contractor APTIM and as such are very familiar with the landfill leachate and gas systems operations. They also have extensive experience in constructing similar improvements to other landfill leachate and gas system infrastructure including the Clover Flat Landfill in Calistoga, CA. Golder has worked with Blue Flame Crew on other projects and have stated that their project performance and completion have been consistently satisfactory. Staff determined the low bidder Blue Flame Crew to be both responsive and responsible per the project contract and public contracting code. Staff recommends that the City Council award a $1,882,900 construction contract to Blue Flame Crew West, LLC and approve contingency in the amount of $380,000 (held by the City.) Page G-4.2
Staff Report #: 22-179-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org Next steps
Subject to the City Council’s award of contract, the project is tentatively scheduled for construction from November 2022 to May 2023. The contract has 100 working days. Before the start of work, Blue Flame Crew will coordinate with the Air District and Water Board to complete their respective permit applications for the work.

Impact on City Resources
The capital improvement program budget includes the project to repair and upgrade both the gas collection and control and leachate collection systems at the landfill. The project currently has an available fund balance of $4,017,997 from the landfill fund. The recommended contract award of $1,882,900 to Blue Flame Crew plus contingency of $380,000 results in a total construction cost of $2,262,900. No additional appropriations are anticipated to complete this construction work at this time.

Environmental Review
This project is categorically exempt under Section 15301 – Existing Facilities of the current California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. This section allows for minor alterations of existing facilities as long as there is negligible or no expansion of use.

Public Notice
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with the agenda items being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

Attachments
A. Construction contract
Report prepared by:

Tanisha Werner, Assistant Public Works Director – Engineering Reviewed by:

Nikki Nagaya, Public Works Director
Page G-4.3

CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT
City Manager’s Office
701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025
tel 650-330-6620
Agreement #:

AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES BETWEEN

THE CITY OF MENLO PARK AND BLUE FLAME CREW WEST, LLC
THIS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT (“Contract”) is made and entered into this ____ day of __________, ______ (“Execution Date”) by and between the CITY OF MENLO PARK, a California municipal corporation, (“City”) and BLUE FLAME CREW WEST, LLC (“Contractor”).

RECITALS
A. Contractor is a California Corporation duly organized and in good standing in the State of California, License Number 993502. Contractor represents and warrants that it has the background and experience set forth in the Contractor’s responses to the notice inviting bids.

B. Contractor represents that it is duly licensed by the State of California and has the background, knowledge, experience and expertise to perform the obligations set forth in this Contract.

C. On July 28, 2022 the City issued a Notice to Contractors inviting bids for the Project. A copy of the Contractor’s Bid proposal and List of Subcontractors is attached herein and incorporated by this reference.

D. The City desires to retain Contractor as an independent contractor to provide the construction and other services identified in this Contract for the Project upon the terms and conditions contained herein.

AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of performance by the parties of the promises, covenants and conditions contained herein, the parties hereby agree as follows:

1. DEFINITIONS. Capitalized terms used throughout the Contract Documents shall have the meanings set forth in this Contract and/or the Special Provisions. If there is a conflict between the definitions in this Contract and the Special Provisions, the definitions in this Contract shall prevail.

2. PROJECT. The project is the construction of Bedwell Bayfront Park Landfill Leachate and Gas Collection Systems Improvement project (“Project”). The work includes all labor, materials, equipment, services, permits, licenses and taxes, and all other things necessary for Contractor to perform its obligations and complete the Project, including, without limitation, any Change Orders executed by City and Contractor in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents (“Work”).

Contractor shall permit City (or its designees) access to the work area, Contractor’s shop, or any other facility, to permit inspection of the Work at all times during construction and/or manufacture and fabrication. The granting of any progress payment, and any inspections, reviews, approvals or oral statements by any City representative, or certification by any governmental entity, shall in no way limit Page G-4.4 ATTACHMENT A
Contractor’s obligations under the Contract Documents.

3. CONTRACT DOCUMENTS.

3.1 List of Documents. The Contract Documents (sometimes collectively referred to as “Agreement” or “Bid Documents”) consist of the following documents which are on file with the Public Works Department and are hereby incorporated by reference.
1) Subcontractors List
2) Change Orders
3) Field Orders
4) Construction Agreement
4) Bidding Addenda
5) Special Provisions
6) Project Plans and Drawings
7) Technical Specifications
8) City Standard Details
9) State of California Department of Transportation Specifications, 2006 Edition (Cal Trans specifications)
10) Bidder Certifications, Questionnaire and Statements 11) Reports listed in the Contract Documents
12) City of Menlo Park Waste Management Form, Waste Management Daily Transport Report 13) City of Menlo Park Truck Route Map and Regulations
14) Performance, Payment and Maintenance Bonds

3.2 Order of Precedence. For the purposes of construing, interpreting and resolving inconsistencies between and among the provisions of this Contract, the Contract Documents shall have the order of precedence as set forth in the preceding section. If a claimed inconsistency cannot be resolved through the order of precedence, the City shall have the sole power to decide which document or provision shall govern as may be in the best interests of the City.

4. PERMITS. Contractor, at its sole expense, shall obtain and maintain during the term of this Contract, all appropriate permits, licenses and certificates that may be required in connection with the performance of the Work, including, but not limited to, a City business license.

5. DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1771(a), Contractor represents that it and all of its Subcontractors are currently registered and qualified to perform public work pursuant to Labor Code Section 1725.5. Contractor covenants that any additional or substitute Subcontractors will be similarly registered and qualified. This Project is subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the DIR. It is the responsibility of the Contractor to ensure all DIR requirements and regulations are met and stay current. For more information, see http://dir.ca.gov/PublicWorks/SB854.html.

6. TERM. This Contract is effective on the Execution Date set forth in the initial paragraph of this Contract and shall remain in effect until the Project has been satisfactorily completed by Contractor, unless earlier terminated pursuant to the terms of this Contract.

7. TIME OF COMPLETION. Time is of the essence with respect to all time limits set forth in the Contract Documents. Contractor shall commence the Work on the date specified in the City’s Notice to Proceed. Contractor shall diligently prosecute the Work to Substantial Completion within 100 (onehundred) working days after the date specified in the City’s Notice to Proceed (“Contract Time”). The Contract Time may only be adjusted for extensions of time approved by the City and agreed to by Page G-4.5
Change Order executed by City and Contractor in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents.

8. COMPENSATION. The City agrees to compensate Contractor for its satisfactory completion of the Work in compliance with the Contract Documents for the not to exceed amount of One-million eighthundred eighty-two thousand and Nine hundred ($1,882,900) (“Contract Sum”). Payment shall be as set forth in the Plans, Special Provisions and/or Technical Specifications. The Contract Sum may only be adjusted by Change Orders issued, executed and satisfactorily performed by Contractor in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. The Contract Sum shall be adjusted (upward or downward) only to account for Change Orders. The Contract Sum is and shall be full compensation for all Work performed by Contractor. The Contract Sum shall cover all losses arising out of the nature of the Work or from the elements or any unforeseen difficulties or obstructions which may arise or be encountered in performance of the Work until its Acceptance by the City, all risks connected with the Work and any and all expenses incurred due to the suspension or discontinuance of the Work.

Should the City withhold retention in connection with the Work, Contractor may elect to substitute securities or direct payment to an escrow account, pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22300 (incorporated herein by this reference).

Contractor shall submit all billings with all necessary invoices or other appropriate evidence of proper performance, after which City shall make payment within thirty (30) days. Upon City’s written request, Contractor shall make available to City, its authorized agents, officers, or employees, any and all ledgers, books of accounts, invoices, vouchers, cancelled checks, and other records or documents evidencing or relating to the Work or the expenditures and disbursement charged to City, and all correspondence, internal memoranda, calculations, books and accounts, records documenting its Work under the Agreement, and invoices, payrolls, timecards, records and all other data related to matters covered by the Agreement. Contractor shall furnish to City, its authorized agents, officers, or employees, such other evidence or information as City may require with regard to the Work or any such expenditure or disbursement charged by Contractor.

9. STANDARD OF PERFORMANCE. As a material inducement to the City to enter into this Contract, Contractor hereby represents and warrants that it has the qualifications and experience necessary to undertake the Work to be provided and the Project to be completed pursuant to this Contract.

Contractor agrees that the Work shall be performed by qualified, experienced and well-supervised personnel. The Work performed pursuant to this Contract shall be performed in a manner consistent with the standard of care under California law applicable to those who specialize in providing such services for projects of the type, scope and complexity of the Project.

10. COMPLIANCE WITH LAW. This Project constitutes a public work within the meaning of California Labor Code Section 1720 et. seq. and is subject to prevailing wage laws. Contractor shall pay prevailing wages to its employees on any contract in excess of $1,000.00. Copies of the general prevailing rates of per diem wages for each craft, classification, or type of worker needed to execute the Contract, as determined by Director of the State of California Department of Industrial Relations, are on file at the City’s Public Works Department and may be obtained from the California Department of Industrial Relations website [http://www.dir.ca.gov/OPRL/DPreWageDetermination.htm]. Contractor shall comply with the 8-hours per day/40 hours per week/overtime/working hours restrictions for all employees, pursuant to the California Labor Code. Contractor and all subcontractors shall keep and maintain accurate employee payroll records for Work performed under the Agreement. The payroll records shall be certified and submitted as required by law, including Labor Code Sections 1771.4 (if applicable) and 1776, including to the Labor Commissioner no less frequently than monthly. Contractor shall comply fully with Labor Code Section 1777.5 in the hiring of apprentices for work relating to this Page G-4.6
Agreement. The Work performed by Contractor pursuant to this Contract shall be provided in accordance with all ordinances, resolutions, statutes, rules and regulations of the City, and any federal, state or local governmental agency having jurisdiction in effect at the time the work is rendered.

11. REPRESENTATIVE. Timothy A. Boos is hereby designated as the project manager/superintendent/foreman of Contractor authorized to act on its behalf with respect to the Work specified in this Contract. It is expressly understood that the experience, knowledge, capability and reputation of Blue Flame Crew West, LLC were a substantial inducement for City to enter into this Contract. Therefore, Timothy A. Boos shall be responsible during the term of this Contract for directing all activities of Contractor and devoting sufficient time to personally supervise the services hereunder.

The representative may not be changed by Contractor without the express written approval of the City.

12. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES.

12.1 Entitlement. City and Contractor acknowledge and agree that if Contractor fails to fully and satisfactorily complete the Work within the Contract Time, the City will suffer, as a result of Contractor’s failure, substantial damages which are both extremely difficult and impracticable to ascertain. Such damages may include, but are not limited to: (a) loss of public confidence in the City and its contractors; (b) loss of public use of public facilities; and (c) extended disruption to public.

12.2 Daily Amount. City and Contractor have reasonably endeavored, but failed, to ascertain the actual damage that the City will incur if the Contractor fails to achieve Substantial Completion of the Work within the Contract Time. Therefore, the parties agree that in addition to all other damages to which the City may be entitled other than delay damages, in the event the Contractor shall fail to achieve Substantial Completion of the Work within the Contract Time, Contractor shall pay City as liquidated damages the amount of five-hundred Dollars ($500) per day for each calendar day after the expiration of the Contract Time until Contractor achieves Substantial Completion of the Work. The liquidated damages amount is not a penalty, but a reasonable estimate of the amount of damages the City will suffer.

Liquidated damages for delay shall cover administrative, overhead, interest on bonds, and general loss of public use damages suffered by City as a result of delay. Liquidated damages shall not cover the cost of completion of the Work, damages resulting from Defective Work, lost revenues or costs of substitute facilities, or damages suffered by others who then seek to recover their damages from City (for example, delay claims of other contractors, subcontractors, tenants, or other third-parties), and defense costs thereof. City may deduct from any money due or to become due to Contractor subsequent to time for completion of entire Work and extensions of time allowed pursuant to provisions hereof, a sum representing then-accrued liquidated damages.

12.3 Apportionment. Such liquidated damages shall be subject to reduction for delays for which Contractor is entitled to receive an extension of time under the Contract Documents (“Apportionment”).

Such Apportionment shall not be affected by the fact that liquidated damages may not be applied for periods of time during which delays have occurred that are caused by both City and Contractor. It is agreed that the liquidated damages shall not be applied for portions of the Work completed prior to the expiration of the Contract Time.

12.4 Exclusive Remedy. City and Contractor acknowledge and agree that this Section 11, Liquidated Damages, shall be the City’s only remedy for delay damages caused by the Contractor’s failure to achieve Substantial Completion of the Work within the Contract Time.

12.5 Damages upon Abandonment. In the event that the Contractor either abandons the Work or is Page G-4.7
terminated for default in accordance with the provisions of this Contract, City shall have the right, in its sole discretion exercised by written notice issued either before or after Substantial Completion, to elect to either assert or waive its right to liquidated damages. If City elects to assert its right to liquidated damages, then the liquidated damages shall be calculated from expiration of the Contract Time to the date that Substantial Completion of the Work is achieved by the City or its replacement contractor employed to complete Contractor’s performance. If City elects to waive its right to liquidated damages, then Contractor shall be liable to the City, in lieu of the liquidated damages, for all actual Losses (as defined in the General Conditions) proximately resulting from Contractor’s failure to complete the Work within the Contract Time.

12.6 Other Remedies. The parties further acknowledge and agree that the City is entitled to any and all available legal and equitable remedies City may have where City’s Losses are caused by any reason other than Contractor’s failure to achieve Substantial Completion of the Work within the Contract Time.

13. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. Contractor is, and shall at all times remain as to the City, a wholly independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the City. Contractor shall receive no premium or enhanced pay for work normally understood as overtime, nor shall Contractor receive holiday pay, sick leave, administrative leave, or pay for any other time not actually worked. The intention of the parties is that Contractor shall not be eligible for benefits and shall receive no compensation from the City except as expressly set forth in this Contract. Contractor shall have no power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability on behalf of the City or otherwise act on behalf of the City as an agent. Neither the City, nor any of its agents shall have control over the conduct of Contractor, any of Contractor’s employees, or any subcontractors, except as set forth in this Contract. Contractor shall at no time, or in any manner, represent that it or any of its agents or employees or subcontractors are in any manner employees of the City. Contractor agrees to pay all required taxes on amounts paid to Contractor under this Contract, and to indemnify and hold the City harmless from any and all taxes, assessments, penalties, and interest asserted against the City by reason of the independent contractor relationship created by this Contract. Pursuant to Labor Code Sections 1860 and 1861, in accordance with the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code, every contractor will be required to secure the payment of compensation to his employees. Contractor represents that it is aware of the provisions of Labor Code Section 3700 that require every employer to be insured against liability for workers’ compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and Contractor shall comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Work. Contractor further agrees to indemnify and hold the City harmless from any failure of Contractor and any subconsultants to comply with applicable worker’s compensation laws.

14. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS; CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Contractor agrees to comply with all applicable federal and state laws, regulations and policies, as amended, including those regarding discrimination, unfair labor practices, anti-kick-back, collusion, and the provisions of the Americans with Disability Act. Contractor shall not engage in unlawful employment discrimination including, but not limited to, discrimination based upon a person’s race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, physical handicap, medical condition, marital status, gender, citizenship, sexual orientation, or sexual identity as prohibited by state or federal law. Contractor covenants that it presently has no interest and shall not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, which may be affected by the work to be performed by Consultant under this Contract, or which would conflict in any manner with the performance of its services hereunder. Contractor further covenants that, in performance of this Contract, no person having any such interest shall be employed by it. Contractor, its officers, partners, associates, agents, and employees, shall not make, participate in making, or in anyway attempt to use the position afforded them by the Contract Documents to influence any governmental decision in which he or she knows or has reason to know that he or she has a financial interest under applicable state, federal and local conflict of interest regulations. Furthermore, Contractor shall avoid the appearance of having any Page G-4.8
interest which would conflict in any manner with the performance of the work pursuant to this Contract.

Contractor agrees not to accept any employment during the term of this Contract which is or may make Contractor financially interested, as provided in California Government Code Sections 1090 and 87100, in any decision made by the City on any matter in connection with which Contractor has been retained pursuant to this Contract. However, nothing herein shall preclude Contractor from accepting other engagements with the City.

15. INDEMNIFICATION.

15.1 To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall indemnify, defend, with independent counsel approved by the City, and hold harmless the City, and its elective or appointive boards, officers, employees agents and volunteers (“Indemnitee”) from and against any and all claims, losses, or liability that may arise out of or result from damages to property or personal injury received by reason of, or in the course of work performed under this Contract due to the acts or omissions of Contractor or Contractor’s officers, employees, agents or subcontractors. The indemnification provisions survive completion of the Work or the termination of this Contract. The acceptance of such services shall not operate as a waiver of such right of indemnification. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing contained herein shall be construed as obligating Contractor to indemnify any Indemnitee for any claims, losses or liability resulting from the sole or active negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnitee. Contractor shall pay City for any costs incurred in enforcing this provision.

15.2 The City does not and shall not waive any rights that they may possess against Contractor because of the acceptance by the City or the deposit with the City of any insurance policy or certificate required pursuant to this Contract. This hold harmless and indemnification provision shall apply regardless of whether or not any insurance policies are determined to be applicable to the claim, demand, damage, liability, loss, cost or expense.

15.3 Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 9201, the City shall timely notify Contractor upon receipt of any third-party claim relating to the Contract.

16. ASSIGNABILITY. The parties agree that the experience and qualifications of Contractor as set forth in the Contractor’s Bid are material considerations for the City entering into this Contract. Consultant shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Contract, without the prior written consent of the City, and any attempt by Contractor to do so shall be void and of no effect and a breach of this Contract. For purposes of this section, the sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Contractor or of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member of Contractor, if a partnership or joint venture or syndicate or co-tenancy exists, which shall result in changing the control of Contractor, shall be construed as an assignment of this Construction Contract.

Control means more than fifty percent (50%) of the voting power of the corporation or other entity.

17. INSURANCE AND BOND REQUIREMENTS.

17.1 Prior to the commencement of any Work, the Contractor shall provide the City with evidence that it has obtained the insurance required by this Section and all bonds, including, but not limited to, payment and performance bonds, required in the Special Provisions. Failure to obtain and maintain the required insurance and bonds to so shall be deemed a material breach of this Contract.

17.2 Insurance Requirements. Contractor shall obtain the following insurance.

A. Worker’s Compensation and Employer’s Liability Insurance: The CONTRACTOR shall have in effect during the entire life of this Contract workers' compensation and Employer's Liability Insurance providing Page G-4.9
full statutory coverage. In signing this Contract, the CONTRACTOR makes the following certification, required by Section 18161 of the California Labor Code: "I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of the Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Contract." B. Commercial General Liability Insurance: The CONTRACTOR shall take out and maintain during the life of this Contract such Bodily Injury Liability and Property Damage Liability Insurance (Commercial General Liability Insurance) on an occurrence basis as shall protect it while performing work covered by this Contract from any and all claims for damages for bodily injury, including accidental death, as well as claims for property damage which may arise from the CONTRACTOR's operations under this Contract, whether such operations be by CONTRACTOR or by any sub-consultant or by anyone directly or indirectly employed by either of them. The amounts of such insurance shall be not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) per occurrence and four million dollars ($4,000,000) in aggregate, or four million dollars ($4,000,000) combined single limit bodily injury and property damage for each occurrence.

CONTRACTOR shall provide the City with acceptable evidence of coverage, including a copy of all declarations of coverage exclusions.

C. Automobile Liability Insurance: CONTRACTOR shall maintain Automobile Liability Insurance pursuant to this Contract in an amount of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) for each accident combined single limit or not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) for any one (1) person, and one million dollars ($1,000,000) for any one (1) accident, and Three Hundred Thousand Dollars, ($300,000) property damage.

17.3 CITY and its subsidiary agencies, and their officers, agents, employees and servants shall be named as additional insured on any such policies of Commercial General Liability and Automobile Liability Insurance, (but not for the workers' compensation), which shall also contain a provision that the insurance afforded thereby to the CITY, its subsidiary agencies, and their officers, agents, employees, and servants shall be primary insurance to the full limits of liability of the policy, and that if the CITY, its subsidiary agencies and their officers and employees have other insurance against a loss covered by a policy, such other insurance shall be excess insurance only.

17.4 In the event of the breach of any provision of this Section, or in the event any notice is received which indicates any required insurance coverage will be diminished or canceled, CITY, at its option, may, notwithstanding any other provision of this Contract to the contrary, immediately declare a material breach of this Contract and suspend all further work pursuant to this Contract.

17.5. Before the execution of this Contract, any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by CITY.

18. EARTHWORK AND UNDERGROUND FACILITIES. If the Work involves digging trenches or other excavations that extend deeper than four feet below the surface, Contractor shall notify City in writing of any material that Contractor believes may be hazardous waste that is required to be removed in accordance law, subsurface or latent physical conditions at the site differing from those indicated by information about the site made available to bidders prior to the deadline for submitting bids, or unknown physical conditions at the site of any unusual nature, different materially from those ordinarily encountered and generally recognized as inherent in work of the character provided for in the Contract Documents, pursuant to Section 7104 of the Public Contract Code. For any Work involving trench shoring that costs in excess of $25,000, Contractor shall submit and City (or a registered civil or structural engineer employed by City) must accept, in advance of excavation, a detailed plan showing the design of shoring, bracing, sloping, or other provisions to be made for worker protection from the Page G-4.10
hazard of caving ground during the excavation of such trench or trenches, pursuant to Labor Code Section 6705. If such plan varies from the shoring system standards, the plan shall be prepared by a registered civil or structural engineer. Consistent with Government Code Section 4215, as between City and Contractor, City will be responsible for the timely removal, relocation, or protection of existing main or trunk line utility facilities located on the Site only if such utilities are not identified in the Contract Documents or information made available for bidding.

19. DEFECTIVE WORK; WARRANTIES. Contractor warrants that all construction services shall be performed in accordance with generally accepted professional standards of good and sound construction practices, all Contract Documents requirements, and all laws, codes, standards, licenses, and permits. Contractor warrants that all materials and equipment shall be new, of suitable grade of their respective kinds for their intended uses, and free from defects. Contractor hereby grants to City for a period of one year following the date of completion its unconditional warranty of the quality and adequacy of all of the Work including, without limitation, all labor, materials and equipment provided by Contractor and its Subcontractors of all tiers. If either prior to completion of the Work, or within one year after completion, any Work (completed or incomplete) is found to violate any of the foregoing warranties (Defective Work), Contractor shall promptly, without cost to City and in accordance with City’s written instructions, correct, remove and replace the Defective Work with conforming Work, and correct, remove and replace any damage to other Work or other property resulting therefrom. If Contractor fails to do so, Contractor shall pay all of the City’s resulting claims, costs, losses and damages. Where Contractor fails to correct Defective Work, or defects are discovered outside the correction period, City shall have all rights and remedies granted by law.

20. SUSPENSION. The City may, at any time and from time to time, without cause, order Contractor, in writing (“Suspension Order”), to suspend, delay, or interrupt the Work in whole or in part for such period of time, up to an aggregate of fifty percent (50%) of the Contract Time, as City may determine, with such period of suspension to be computed from the date of the Suspension Order. Upon receipt of a Suspension Order, Contractor shall, at City’s expense, comply with its terms and take all reasonable steps to minimize costs allocable to the Work covered by the Suspension Order during the period of work stoppage. Within the period of the above noted aggregate time, or such extension to that period as is agreed upon by Contractor and City, City shall either cancel the Suspension Order or delete the work covered by the Suspension Order by issuing a Change Order. If a Suspension Order is canceled or expires, Contractor shall resume and continue with the Work. A Change Order will be issued to cover any adjustments of the Contract Sum or the Contract Time necessarily caused by such suspension. All claims by Contractor against City shall be submitted in writing to City, and shall be governed by Public Contract Code Sections 9204 and 20104 – 20104.6, after which time the one year time period in Government Code Section 911.2 shall be, pursuant to Government Code Section 930.2, reduced to 90 days.

21. BOOKS AND RECORDS. Contractor shall keep full and detailed accounts and exercise such controls as may be necessary for proper financial management under this Contract in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and practices consistently applied. City and City's accountants shall be afforded access at all times during normal business hours, to inspect, audit and copy Contractor's records, books, estimates, take-offs, cost reports, ledgers, schedules, correspondence, instructions, drawings, receipts, subcontracts, purchase orders, vouchers, memoranda and other data relating to this Project, and Contractor shall preserve these for a period of three years after the later of (i) final payment or (ii) final resolution of all Contract Disputes and other disputes or for such longer period as may be required by law. Contractor’s compliance with any request by City pursuant to this Section18 shall be a condition precedent to filing or maintenance of any legal action or proceeding by Contractor against City and to Contractor's right to receive further payments under the Contract Documents. Any failure by Contractor to provide access to its business records for inspection or Page G-4.11
copying by City shall be specifically enforceable by issuance of a writ or a provisional or permanent mandatory injunction by a court of competent jurisdiction based on affidavits submitted to such court, without the necessity of oral testimony.

22. WAIVER. Waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any one or more terms or conditions of this Contract shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other term or condition contained herein or a waiver of any subsequent breach or violation of the same or any other term or condition. Acceptance by the City of the performance of any work by the Contractor shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any term or condition of this Contract. In no event shall the City’s making of any payment to Contractor constitute or be construed as a waiver by the City of any breach of this Contract, or any default which may then exist on the part of Contractor, and the making of any such payment by the City shall in no way impair or prejudice any right or remedy available to the City with regard to such breach or default.

23. DEFAULT. In the event the City determines, in its sole discretion, that Contractor has failed or refused to perform any of the obligations set forth in the Contract Documents, or is in breach of any provision of the Contract Documents, the City may give written notice of default to Contractor in the manner specified for this giving of notices in this Contract. Except for emergencies, Contractor shall cure any default in performance of its obligations under the Contract Documents within two (2) business days after receipt of written notice. However, if the breach cannot be reasonably cured within such time, Contractor will commence to cure the breach within two (2) days and will diligently and continuously prosecute such cure to completion within a reasonable time, which shall in no event be later than ten (10) days after receipt of such written notice.

24. CITY RIGHTS AND REMEDIES.

24.1 Remedies Upon Default. In the event that Contractor fails to cure any default of this Contract within the time period set forth in Section 20, then City may pursue any remedies available under law or equity, including, without limitation, the following: (1) the City may, without terminating the Contract, delete certain portions of the Work, reserving to itself all rights to losses related thereto; (2) the City may, without terminating the Contract, engage others to perform the Work or portion of the Work that has not been performed by the Contractor and withhold the cost thereof to City from future payments to the Contractor, reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto; or (3) the City may, without terminating the Contract and reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto, suspend all or any portion of this Construction Contract for as long a period of time as City determines, in its sole discretion, appropriate, in which event City shall have no obligation to adjust the Contract Sum or Contract Time, and shall have no liability to Contractor for damages if City directs Contractor to resume Work; (4) the City may terminate all or any part of this Contract for default, reserving to itself all rights of Losses related thereto; or (5) the City may, without terminating the Contract and reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto, exercise its rights under the Performance Bond.

24.2 Additional Provisions. All of City’s rights and remedies under this Contract are cumulative, and shall be in addition to those rights and remedies available in law or in equity. Designation in the Contract Documents of certain breaches as material shall not be construed as implying that other breaches not so designated are not material nor shall such designations be construed as limiting City’s right to terminate the Contract, or the exercise of its other rights or remedies for default, to only material breaches. City’s determination of whether there has been noncompliance with the Contract so as to warrant exercise by City of its rights and remedies for default under the Contract, shall be binding on all parties. No termination or action taken by City after such termination shall prejudice any other rights or remedies of City provided by law or equity or by the Contract Documents upon such termination; and City may proceed against Contractor to recover all liquidated damages and Losses suffered by City.

24.3 Delays by Sureties. Without limitation to any of City’s other rights or remedies under the law, City Page G-4.12
has the right to suspend the performance by Contractor’s sureties in the event of any of the following:
(1) failure of the sureties to begin Work within a reasonable time in such manner as to insure full compliance with the Contract within the Contract Time; (2) abandonment of the Work; (3) if at any time City is of the opinion the Work is unnecessarily or unreasonably delayed; (4) willful violation of any terms of the Contract; (5) failure to perform according to the Contract Documents; or (6) failure to follow instructions of City for its completion within the Contract Time. City will serve notice of such failure upon the sureties and in the event the sureties neglect or refuse to cure the breach within the time specified in such notice, City shall have the power to suspend the performance or any part thereof of the sureties.

24.4 Damages to the City. The City will be entitled to recovery of all Losses under law or equity in the event of Contract’s default under the Contract Documents. In the event that City's Losses arise from Contractor’s default under the Contract Documents, City shall be entitled to withhold monies otherwise payable to Contractor until Final Completion, as defined in the General Conditions, of the Project. If City incurs Losses due to Contractor’s default, then the amount of Losses shall be deducted from the amounts withheld. Should the amount withheld exceed the amount deducted, the balance will be paid to Contractor or its designee upon Final Completion of the Project. If the Losses incurred by City exceed the amount withheld, Contractor shall be liable to City for the difference and shall promptly remit same to City.

24.5 Termination of the Contract for Default. Without limitation to any of City’s other rights or remedies at law or in equity, and reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto, City shall have the right to terminate this Contract, in whole or in part, upon the failure of Contractor to promptly cure any default.

City’s election to terminate the Contract for default shall be communicated by giving Contractor a written notice of termination in the manner specified for the giving of notices in the Contract. Any notice of termination given to Contractor by City shall be effective immediately, unless otherwise provided therein. Should Contractor be terminated for default, and such termination is subsequently determined to be wrongful, such termination will be converted to a termination for convenience as provided herein.

24.6 Termination Without Cause. City shall have the option, at its sole discretion and without cause, of terminating this Contract in part or in whole by giving thirty (30) days written notice to Contractor.

Contractor agrees to accept such sums as allowed under this Section as its sole and exclusive compensation and waives any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential, direct, indirect or incidental damages of any kind.

24.7 Compensation. Following termination without cause and within forty-five (45) days after receipt of a billing from Contractor seeking payment of sums authorized by this Section, City shall pay to Contractor as its sole compensation for performance of the Work the following: (1) the amount of the Contract Sum allocable to the portion of the Work properly performed by Contractor as of the date of termination, less sums previously paid to Contractor; (2) reasonable costs of Contractor and its Subcontractors and Sub-subcontractors for demobilizing and administering the close-out of its participation in the Project (including, without limitation, all billing and accounting functions, not including attorney or expert fees) for a period of no longer than thirty (30) days after receipt of the notice of termination in an amount not to exceed the daily sum payable to Contractor for Compensable Delays; (3) previously unpaid cost of any items delivered to the Project Site which were fabricated for subsequent incorporation in the Work.

24.8 Subcontractors. Contractor shall include provisions in all of its subcontracts, purchase orders and other contracts permitting termination for convenience by Contractor on terms that are consistent with this Contract and that afford no greater rights of recovery against Contractor than are afforded to Contractor under this Section.

Page G-4.13

24.9 Contractor’s Duties Upon Termination. Upon receipt of a notice of termination for default or for convenience, Contractor shall, unless the notice directs otherwise, do the following: (1) immediately discontinue the Work to the extent specified in the notice; (2) place no further orders or subcontracts for materials, equipment, services or facilities, except as may be necessary for completion of such portion of the Work as is not discontinued; (3) provide to City a description, in writing no later than fifteen (15) days after receipt of the notice of termination, of all subcontracts, purchase orders and contracts that are outstanding, including, without limitation, the terms of the original price, any changes, payments, balance owing, the status of the portion of the Work covered and a copy of the subcontract, purchase order or contract and any written changes, amendments or modifications thereto, together with such other information as City may determine necessary in order to decide whether to accept assignment of or request Contractor to terminate the subcontract, purchase order or contract; (4) promptly assign to City those subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions thereof, that City elects to accept by assignment and cancel, on the most favorable terms reasonably possible, all subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions thereof, that City does not elect to accept by assignment; and (5) hereafter do only such Work as may be necessary to preserve and protect Work already in progress and to protect materials, plants, and equipment on the Project Site or in transit thereto.

25. CONTRACTOR’S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. Contractor may terminate this Construction Contract for cause only upon the occurrence of one of the following: (1) the Work is stopped for sixty (60) consecutive days, through no act or fault of Contractor, any subcontractor or any employee or agent of Contractor or any subcontractor, due to issuance of an order of a court or other public authority other than City having jurisdiction or due to an act of government, such as a declaration of a national emergency making material unavailable; or (2) if the City does not make payment of sums that are not in good faith disputed by the City and does not cure such default within ninety (90) days after receipt of notice from Contractor, then upon an additional thirty (30) days’ notice to City, Contractor may terminate the Contract.

25.1 Damages to Contractor. In the event of termination for cause by Contractor, City shall pay Contractor the sums provided for in Section 21 above. Contractor agrees to accept such sums as its sole and exclusive compensation and agrees to waive any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential, direct, indirect and incidental damages, of any kind.

26. NOTICES. Any notices or other communications required or permitted to be given under this Contract shall be given in writing by personal delivery, by a recognized courier service, or by U.S. mail, postage prepaid, and return receipt requested, addressed to the respective parties as follows:

To City: To Contractor:

Assistant Public Works Director/City Engineer
City of Menlo Park
City Hall, 701 Laurel St.

Menlo Park, CA 94025

27. Notice shall be deemed communicated on the earlier of actual receipt or 48 hours after deposit in the U.S. mail, or the date of delivery shown on deliverer’s receipt. In the event of any change of address, the moving party is obligated to notify the other party of the change of address in writing within a reasonable period of time.

In addition, copies of all Claims by Contractor under this contract shall be provided to the City Attorney as follows:

Page G-4.14
To City Attorney:

City Attorney for Menlo Park
Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP
181 Third Street, Suite 200
San Rafael, CA 94901
All claims shall be delivered personally or sent by certified mail.

28. NON-DISCRIMINATION AND EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY. In the performance of this Contract, Contractor shall not discriminate against any employee, subcontractor or applicant for employment because of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental handicap, or medical condition. Contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that employees are treated without regard to race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental handicap, or medical condition.

29. CONTRACT DOCUMENTS AND PRECEDENCE. The Contract Documents shall consist of the following documents. In case of inconsistencies between Contract Documents, the documents are listed in order of precedence.

30. PUBLIC WORKS CLAIMS. This Contract is subject to Public Contracts Code Section 9204 governing contractor claims. Accordingly, should any clarification, determination, action or inaction by City, Work, or any other event, in the opinion of Contractor, exceed the requirements of or not comply with Contract Documents, or otherwise result in Contractor seeking additional compensation in time or money or damages for any reason (collectively "Disputed Work"), then Contractor and City will make good faith attempts to resolve informally any and all such issues, claims and/or disputes. Before commencing the Disputed Work, or within seven Days after Contractor's first knowledge of the Disputed Work, whichever is earlier, Contractor shall file a written notice and cost proposal for the Disputed Work with City stating clearly and in detail its objection and reasons for contending the Work or interpretation is outside the requirements of Project Documents. If a written notice and cost proposal for Disputed Work is not issued within this time period, or if Contractor proceeds with the Disputed Work without first having given the notice required by this paragraph, Contractor shall waive its rights to further claim on the specific issue.

A. City will review Contractor's timely notice and cost proposal for Disputed Work and provide a decision. If, after receiving the decision, Contractor disagrees with it or still considers the Work required of it to be outside of the requirements of Project Documents, it shall so notify City, in writing, within seven Days after receiving the decision, by submitting a notice of potential claim, stating that a formal claim will be issued. Within 30 Days of receiving the decision, Contractor shall submit its claim in the form specified herein and all arguments, justification, cost or estimates, schedule analysis, and detailed documentation supporting its position. Contractor's failure to furnish notification within seven Days and all justifying documentation within 30 Days will result in Contractor waiving its right to the subject claim.

B. Claim Format

1. A. Contractor shall submit the claim justification in the following format:
(a) Cover letter and certification;
(b) Summary of claim, including underlying facts, entitlement, schedule analysis, quantum calculations, Project provisions supporting relief;
(c) List of documents relating to claim including Specifications, Drawings/Plans clarifications/requests for information, schedules, notices of delay, cost calculations and any others; Page G-4.15
(d) Chronology of events and correspondence:
(e) Analysis of claim merit;
(f) Analysis of claim cost; and
(g) Attach supporting documents referenced in paragraph 2.14,C.1(c), above..

C. Required Provisions on Contract Claim Resolution

1. Public Contract Code Section 9204 specifies provisions on resolving contract claims of any size, and Public Contract Code Section 201014, et seq., specifies required provisions on resolving contract claims less than $375,000. Those statutes constitute a part of this Contract. In the event any other Contract provision violates such statutes, the applicable statute controls.

2. Public Contract Code Section 9204 provides:
(a) For the purposes of this section, “Claim” means a separate demand by Contractor for (1) a time extension, (2) payment or money or damages arising from Work done by or on behalf of Contractor arising under the Contract Documents and payment of which is not otherwise expressly provided for or the Claimant is not otherwise entitled to, or (3) an amount the payment of which is disputed by City. (b) Procedure:
(1) Upon receipt of a Claim the City shall conduct a reasonable review of the Claim and within 45 days, or if City’s governing body must approve City’s response to the Claim and the governing body has not met within the 45 days then within three (3) days of the governing body’s meeting, shall provide Contractor with a written statement identifying what portion of the claim is disputed and what portion is undisputed. Should City take no action on the Claim within 45 days of submission, it shall be deemed denied.
(2) If the Contractor disputes City’s response to its Claim, including a failure to respond, it may submit via registered mail or certified mail, return receipt requested, a written demand for an informal conference to meet and confer for settlement of the issues in dispute. City shall schedule such a meet and confer conference within 30 days for settlement of the dispute. Within ten (10) days of the meet and confer conference City shall provide Contractor with a written statement identifying the portion of the Claim that remains in dispute and the portion that is undisputed. If the Contractor disputes City’s statement it shall inform City and they shall mutually agree to a mediator within 10 business days of the written statement.
(3) City shall pay the undisputed portions of the Claim within 60 days of the issuance of a written statement identifying an undisputed portion.
(4) Any disputed portion of the Claim, as identified by the Contractor in writing, shall be submitted to nonbinding mediation, with the City and the claimant sharing the associated costs equally. The City and claimant shall mutually agree to a mediator within 10 business days after the disputed portion of the claim has been identified in writing. If the parties cannot agree upon a mediator, each party shall select a mediator and those mediators shall select a qualified neutral third party to mediate with regard to the disputed portion of the claim. Each party shall bear the fees and costs charged by its respective mediator in connection with the selection of the neutral mediator. If mediation is unsuccessful, the parts of the Claim remaining in dispute shall be subject to applicable procedures outside this section. (5) For claims under $375,000, unless the parties agree otherwise in writing, mediation pursuant to these provisions shall excuse the mediation obligation under Public Contracting Code section 20104.4(a).
(6) The parties may mutually agree, in writing, to waive the mediation requirements of this subsection and proceed to the commencement of a civil action.
(7) Failure by the City to respond to a Claim from a Contractor within the time periods described in this subdivision or to otherwise meet the time requirements of this section shall result in the claim being deemed rejected in its entirety. A Claim that is denied by reason of the public entity’s failure to have responded to a Claim, or its failure to otherwise meet the time requirements of this section, shall not constitute an adverse finding with regard to the merits of the Claim or the responsibility or qualifications Page G-4.16
of the claimant.
(8) Amounts not paid in a timely manner as required by this section shall bear interest at 7 percent per annum.
(9) If a Subcontractor or a lower tier subcontractor lacks legal standing to assert a claim against City because privity of contract does not exist, the Contractor may present to the City a claim on behalf of a Subcontractor or lower tier subcontractor. A Subcontractor may request in writing, either on his or her own behalf or on behalf of a lower tier subcontractor, that the Contractor present a claim for work which was performed by the Subcontractor or by a lower tier subcontractor on behalf of the Subcontractor.

The Subcontractor requesting that the Claim be presented to the public entity shall furnish reasonable documentation to support the claim. Within 45 days of receipt of this written request, the Contractor shall notify the Subcontractor in writing as to whether the Contractor presented the claim to the City and, if the original Contractor did not present the claim, provide the Subcontractor with a statement of the reasons for not having done so.
(10) Nothing in this section shall impose liability upon an City that makes loans or grants available through a competitive application process, for the failure of an awardee to meet its contractual obligations.
(11) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2020, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute, that is enacted before January 1, 2020, deletes or extends that date.

3. To the extent applicable, Public Contract Code Section 20104, et seq., provide:
(a) For the purposes of this section, “Claim” means a separate demand by Contractor of $375,000 or less for (1) a time extension, (2) payment or money or damages arising from Work done by or on behalf of Contractor arising under the Contract Documents and payment of which is not otherwise expressly provided for or the Claimant is not otherwise entitled to, or (3) an amount the payment of which is disputed by City. Separate Contractor Claims that together total more than $375,000 do not qualify as a “separate demand of $375,000 or less,” as referenced above, and are not subject to this section. (b) Caution. This section does not apply to tort claims, and nothing in this section is intended nor shall be construed to change the time periods for filing tort claims or actions specified by Chapter 1 and Chapter 2 of Part 3 of Division 3.6 of Title 1 of the Government Code. (c) Procedure:
(1) The Claim must be in writing, submitted in compliance with all requirements of General Conditions including, without limitation, the time prescribed by and including the documents necessary to substantiate the Claim. Nothing in this section is intended to extend the time limit or supersede notice requirements for the filing of claims as set forth in the General Conditions or elsewhere in the Contract Documents.
(2) For Claims of fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) or less, City shall respond in writing within forty-five (45) days of receipt of the Claim, or City may request in writing within thirty (30) days of receipt of the Claim, any additional documentation supporting the Claim or relating to any defenses or claims City may have against Claimant. If additional information is thereafter required, it shall be requested and provided in accordance with this section upon mutual agreement of City and Claimant. City’s written response to the Claim, as further documented, shall be submitted to Claimant within fifteen (15) days after receipt of further documentation or within a period of time no greater than taken by Claimant in producing the additional information, whichever is greater. (3) For Claims over Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000) and less than or equal to $375,000: City shall respond in writing within sixty (60) days of receipt of the Claim, or City may request in writing within thirty (30) days of receipt of the Claim, any additional documentation supporting the Claim or relating to any defenses or claims City may have against Claimant. If additional information is thereafter required, it shall be requested and provided in accordance with this section, upon mutual agreement of City and Claimant; City’s written response to the Claim, as further documented, shall be submitted to Claimant within thirty (30) days after receipt of further documentation or within a period of time no greater than taken by Claimant in producing the additional information, whichever is greater.

Page G-4.17
(4) Meet and Confer: If Claimant disputes City’s written response, or City fails to respond within the time prescribed above, Claimant shall notify City, in writing, either within fifteen (15) days of receipt of City’s response or within fifteen (15) days of City’s failure to timely respond, and demand an informal conference to meet and confer for settlement of the issues in dispute. Upon demand City will schedule a meet and confer conference within thirty (30) days for settlement of the dispute. (5) Following the meet and confer conference, if the Claim or any portion remains in dispute, Claimant may file a claim as provided in Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 900) and Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 910) of Part 3 of Division 3.6 of Title 1 of the Government Code. For purposes of those provisions, the running of the period of time within which a claim must be filed shall be tolled from the time Claimant submits its written claim as set forth herein, until the time that Claim is denied as a result of the meet and confer process, including any period of time utilized by the meet and confer process.

31. ATTORNEYS’ FEES; VENUE. The Agreement shall be deemed to have been executed in the City of Menlo Park, California. Enforcement of the Contract Documents shall be governed by the laws of the State of California, excluding its conflict of laws rules. Except as expressly provided in the Contract Documents, nothing in the Contract Documents shall operate to confer rights or benefits on persons or entities not party to the Agreement. As between the parties to the Agreement, any applicable statute of limitations for any act or failure to act shall commence to run on the date of City’s issuance of the final Certificate for Payment, or termination of the Contract Documents, whichever is earlier, except for latent defects, for which the statute of limitation shall begin running upon discovery of the defect and its cause.In the event that any party to this Contract commences any legal action or proceeding to enforce or interpret the provisions of this Contract, the prevailing party in such action or proceeding shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees and other costs incurred in that action or proceeding, in addition to any other relief to which the successful party may be entitled. The venue for any litigation shall be San Mateo County.

32. COOPERATION. In the event any claim or action is brought against the City relating to Contractor’s performance or services under this Agreement, Contractor shall render any reasonable assistance and cooperation which City might require.

33. NUISANCE. Contractor shall not maintain, commit, nor permit the maintenance or commission of any nuisance in connection with the performance of services under this Contract.

34. GOVERNING LAW. This Contract shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of California.

35. COMPLETE AGREEMENT; SEVERABILITY. This Contract, and any other documents incorporated herein by reference, represent the entire and integrated agreement between the City and Contractor.

This Contract supersedes all prior oral and written negotiations, representations or agreements. No prior oral or written understanding shall be of any force or effect with respect to those matters covered hereunder. This Contract may only be modified by a written amendment duly executed by the parties to this Contract. In case a provision of this Contract is held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be affected. 36, NO MODIFICATION OR WAIVER. The Contract Documents may not be modified, nor may compliance with any of its terms be waived, except by written instrument executed and approved by fully authorized representatives of City and Contractor. Contract Documents headings are for convenience only and do not affect the construction of the Contract Documents.

37. COUNTERPARTS. This Contract may be signed in multiple counterparts, which shall, when executed by all the parties constitute a single binding contract.

Page G-4.18
Signatures on next page.

Page G-4.19
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement on the day and year first above written.

FOR FIRST PARTY:

Signature Date
Printed name Title
Tax ID#
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Nira F. Doherty, City Attorney Date
FOR CITY OF MENLO PARK:

Justin I. C. Murphy, City Manager Date
ATTEST:

Judi A. Herren, City Clerk Date
Page G-4.20
City Attorney

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org

STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 9/20/2022
Staff Report Number: 22-180-CC
Consent Calendar: Waive the second reading and adopt an ordinance repealing and replacing Menlo Park Municipal Code
Section 2.04.190 relating to filling City Council
vacancies
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council waive the second reading and adopt an ordinance (Attachment A) of the City Council of the City of Menlo Park repealing and replacing Section 2.04.190, “Filling of Vacancies on the City Council,” of Chapter 2.04 within Title 2 of the Menlo Park Municipal Code (MPMC.) Policy Issues
There is currently a conflict between State law and MPMC provisions relating to vacancies. The proposed ordinance would revise MPMC Section 2.04.190 to correct the conflict by identifying the process in Government Code Section 36512 and allowing the City Council to appoint or call a special election to fill the vacancy.

Background
At the August 23, 2022 City Council meeting, the City Council discussed MPMC Section 2.04.190 relating to filling City Council vacancies. Currently, MPMC Section 2.04.190, which codifies Ordinance No. 559, contains timing requirements that directly conflict with Government Code Section 36512. MPMC Section

2.04.190 requires that if a vacancy occurs, the City Council shall call an election to be held at the next regularly scheduled election, at least 89 days after the vacancy is created. Government Code Sections 36512(c)(1-3) specify that the special election shall be held at the next regularly established election date not less than 114 days from the call of the special election or filing of a petition. Because the provisions in MPMC Section 2.04.190 relating to the timing of the election conflict with the language in Government Code Section 36512(c)(1-3), the City would be preempted from relying on the timing requirements in MPMC Section 2.04.190.

The City Council also discussed potential options identified in Government Code Section 36512 for filling vacancies at the August 23 meeting. At that meeting, the City Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance that defaulted to the State process set forth in Government Code Section 36512, allowing City Council to determine each time a vacancy occurs whether to appoint or call a special election. On September 13, the City Council waived first reading of the proposed ordinance, and referred the ordinance to second reading for adoption.

Analysis
The proposed ordinance repealing and replacing MPMC Section 2.04.190 in its entirety to read as follows:

AGENDA ITEM G-5 Page G-5.1
Staff Report #: 22-180-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org “If a vacancy occurs in the office of a member of the City Council, the City Council may appoint or call a special election in order to fill the City Council vacancy, in conformance with the provisions of Government Code Section 36512, as that Section may be amended. If the City Council decides to fill the vacancy by appointment, the appointment shall be made pursuant to an appointment process set forth in a separate resolution of the City Council, which resolution may be amended from time to time.” This change would mean that when a vacancy occurs on the City Council, the City Council would utilize the process identified in Government Code Section 36512, which sets forth the statutory requirements relating to filling vacancies in an elective or appointed office. Subdivision (b) of that Section provides two options to fill a vacancy in an elective office within 60 days from the commencement of the vacancy: either fill the vacancy by appointment or call a special election to fill the vacancy. Subdivision (b) reads in relevant part as follows:

1. If the City Council calls a special election, the special election shall be held on the next regularly established election1 date not less than 114 days from the call of the special election. A person elected to fill a vacancy holds office for the unexpired term of the former incumbent.

2. If the City Council fills the vacancy by appointment, the person appointed to fill the vacancy shall hold office pursuant to one of the following:

A. If the vacancy occurs in the first half of a term of office and at least 130 days before the next general municipal election, the person appointed to fill the vacancy shall hold office until the next general municipal election that is scheduled 130 or more days after the date the City Council is notified of the vacancy, and thereafter until the person who is elected at that election to fill the vacancy has been qualified. The person elected to fill the vacancy shall hold office for the unexpired balance of the term of office.

B. If the vacancy occurs in the first half of a term of office, but less than 130 days before the next general municipal election, or if the vacancy occurs in the second half of a term of office, the person appointed to fill the vacancy shall hold office for the unexpired term of the former incumbent.

This proposed ordinance would eliminate the conflict between State law and MPMC Section 2.04.190 relating to timing.

Impact on City Resources
As of August 2022, the estimated cost of consolidated election services for the one City Councilmember seat is approximately between $12,100 and $14,533.

Environmental Review
The proposed actions would be exempt from environmental review as the adoption of the proposed ordinance and resolution do not qualify as a “project” pursuant to Public Resource Code Section 21065 and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Sections 15320, 15378 and 15061(b)(3), since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that adoption of the Resolution or ordinance would cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.

1 While there is no definition for “regularly established election” as used in Government Code § 36512(b), it can reasonably be construed to mean an election established by the City Council following the requirements for holding a special election.

Page G-5.2
Staff Report #: 22-180-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org Public Notice
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with the agenda items being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

Attachments
A. Ordinance
Report prepared by:

Nira Doherty, City Attorney
Report reviewed by:

Justin Murphy, City Manager
Judi A. Herren, Assistant to the City Manager/City Clerk Page G-5.3
ORDINANCE NO. XXXX

ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MENLO PARK REPEALING AND REPLACING SECTION 2.04.190, “FILLING OF VACANCIES ON THE CITY COUNCIL,” OF CHAPTER 2.04 WITHIN TITLE 2 OF THE MENLO

PARK MUNICIPAL CODE
WHEREAS, in 1974, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 559 establishing a process for filling vacancies on the City Council; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 559 is codified in Section 2.04.190 of the Menlo Park Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, on August 23, 2022, the City Council discussed the various options available to public agencies to fill vacancies of elected officers; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to repeal Section 2.04.190 and replace the provision with language that conforms to the requirements in Government Code Section 36512, which provides, among other things, that a city may appoint or call a special election within sixty days of a vacancy.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MENLO PARK:

SECTION 1. Findings.

The above recitals are hereby declared to be true and correct findings of the City Council of the City of Menlo Park.

SECTION 2. Repeal and Replace. Section 2.04.190 - Filling of vacancies on the City Council of Chapter 2.04 - City Council of Title 2 - Administration and Personnel of the Menlo Park Municipal Code is hereby repealed in its entirety and replaced to read as follows:
“Section 2.04.190-Filling of vacancies on the City Council If a vacancy occurs in the office of a member of the City Council, the City Council may appoint or call a special election in order to fill the City Council vacancy, in conformance with the provisions of Government Code section 36512, as that section may be amended. If the City Council decides to fill the vacancy by appointment, the appointment shall be made pursuant to an appointment process set forth in a separate Resolution of the City Council, which Resolution may be amended from time to time.”
SECTION 3. Severability.

If any provision or clause of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held to be unconstitutional or to be otherwise invalid by a final judgment of any court or competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or clauses or application, and to this end, the provisions and clauses of this ordinance are declared to be severable.

SECTION 4. California Environmental Quality Act.

This Ordinance is not subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq. and the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal.

Code Regs. §§ 15000 et. seq.), including without limitation, Public Resources Code Section Page G-5.4 ATTACHMENT A
Ordinance No. XXXX

21065 and California Code of Regulations 15378 as this is not a “project” that may cause a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment and if a “project,” is exempt under the “common sense” exception (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15061(b)(3)) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that this action may have a significant effect on the environment.

SECTION 5. Publication; Effective Date.

This Ordinance shall be published once, in full or in summary form, after its final passage, in a newspaper of general circulation, published, and circulated in the City of Menlo Park, and shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. If published in summary form, the summary shall also be published within fifteen (15) days after the adoption, together with the names of those City Councilmembers voting for or against same, in a newspaper of general circulation published and circulated in the City of Menlo Park, County of San Mateo, State of California.

INTRODUCED on the thirteenth day of September, 2022.

PASSED AND ADOPTED as an ordinance of the City of Menlo Park at a regular meeting of said City Council on the twentieth day of September, 2022, by the following votes:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
________________________
Betsy Nash, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Judi A. Herren, City Clerk
Page G-5.5
City Attorney

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org

STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 9/20/2022
Staff Report Number: 22-181-CC
Consent Calendar: Adopt a resolution establishing the process for appointment of candidates to City Council seats to
fill vacancies
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution (Attachment A) establishing the process for appointment of candidates to City Council seats to fill vacancies.

Policy Issues
At the September 20 City Council meeting, the City Council held a second reading and adoption on a proposed ordinance repealing and replacing MPMC Section 2.04.190 in its entirety which read as follows:
“If a vacancy occurs in the office of a member of the City Council, the City Council may appoint or call a special election in order to fill the City Council vacancy, in conformance with the provisions of Government Code Section 36512, as that Section may be amended. If the City Council decides to fill the vacancy by appointment, the appointment shall be made pursuant to an appointment process set forth in a separate resolution of the City Council, which resolution may be amended from time to time.” By enacting this ordinance, the City Council authorized City Council vacancies to be filled by appointment or election. This ordinance provides that appointments to fill a City Council vacancy shall be made pursuant to an appointment process set forth in the proposed resolution of the City Council.

Background
At the August 23, 2022 City Council meeting, the City Council discussed MPMC Section 2.04.190 relating to filling City Council vacancies. Currently, MPMC Section 2.04.190, which codifies Ordinance No. 559, contains timing requirements that directly conflict with Government Code Section 36512. MPMC Section

2.04.190 requires that if a vacancy occurs, the City Council shall call an election to be held at the next regularly scheduled election, at least 89 days after the vacancy is created. Government Code Sections 36512(c)(1-3) specify that the special election shall be held at the next regularly established election date not less than 114 days from the call of the special election or filing of a petition. Because the provisions in MPMC Section 2.04.190 relating to the timing of the election conflict with the language in Government Code Section 36512(c)(1-3), the City would be preempted from relying on the timing requirements in MPMC Section 2.04.190.

The City Council also discussed potential options identified in Government Code Section 36512 for filling vacancies at the August 23 meeting. At that meeting, the City Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance that defaulted to the State process set forth in Government Code Section 36512, allowing City Council to determine each time a vacancy occurs whether to appoint or call a special election. On September 13, the City Council waived first reading of the proposed ordinance, and referred the ordinance to second reading AGENDA ITEM G-6 Page G-6.1
Staff Report #: 22-181-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org for adoption.

Analysis
Following feedback on the appointment process received by the City Council at the September 13, City Council meeting, staff has drafted and revised the proposed process for the City Council’s consideration.

The appointment process in the proposed resolution provides the following procedures; changes and revisions from the previous version of the resolution considered by the City Council on September 13 are indicated in strikethrough and underline:

A. Upon determination that the City Council desires to appoint someone to a vacant City Council seat, the city clerk shall publish a notice of the vacancy in a newspaper of general circulation, advertise in local online media and social media, and post on the City’s website at least two weeks before the meeting at which the City Council will consider candidates to fill a vacated position. The city clerk may also develop an application to be submitted by the candidates.

B. The notice shall provide:

1. The District in which the City Council vacancy has occurred;

2. The date, time, and place of the meeting where the City Council will conduct interviews and appoint a candidate to fill the vacancy;

3. The deadline for submitting an interested person’s name and other identified information or application prepared by the city clerk; and

4. Information about the Questionnaire identified in Section C below and where a copy of the Questionnaire may be obtained.

C. An individual who is interested in filling the vacancy shall be requested to provide written answers to questions, which are attached hereto as Exhibit A (“Questionnaire”) on the date specified by the city clerk so that the Questionnaire can be included in the agenda package and made public for the meeting at which the City Council conducts interviews of City Council candidates. If the Questionnaire is not provided on or before the date specified by the city clerk, the candidate shall not be interviewed by the City Council and shall not be eligible for appointment to the City Council.

D. Qualified Candidates. The city clerk shall review the submittals from the candidates to ensure that each candidate resides in the District where the vacancy has occurred and has submitted all required documents to confirm that the candidate is a qualified candidate (“Qualified Candidates.”) E. Interviews of Qualified Candidates shall take place during a regular or special City Council meeting, as determined appropriate by the Mayor and the city manager. The following procedures shall govern the interview process:

1. Order of Interview. Prior to commencement of the interviews, candidates shall be placed in a random drawing to determine the order in which candidates are interviewed.

2. Introductions. Candidates shall each be allotted five minutes to introduce themselves to the City Council. Time limits shall be strictly enforced during this phase of the interview. Candidates may all be present at the same time that another candidate is being interviewed.

3. Questions. To ensure equal opportunity and standardization, each City Councilmember will have an opportunity to ask questions of the candidates from the list of questions in the Questionnaire and or follow-up questions to responses that the candidate provided to the Questionnaire. Additional questions not included in the Questionnaire may be asked if approved by the Mayor.

4. Public Comment. The City Council shall hear from members of the public after the City Council has asked all questions of the candidates.

5. Discussion. The City Council shall have the opportunity to discuss and deliberate the candidates.

F. Election by Motion. At the conclusion of discussion, the city clerk will ask each City Councilmember for their nominations. The candidate that receives the most nominations will be brought up for a motion and vote on appointment to the vacant office. If no candidate receives more nominations than any other candidate, any City Councilmember may move to appoint one of the candidates to the vacant office. If Page G-6.2
Staff Report #: 22-181-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org the motion to appoint fails, the nominations shall continue until a motion is supported by a majority of the City Council. A motion to appoint must be supported by a majority of the City Council in order for an appointment to be made. At the conclusion of discussion, any voting City Councilmember may move to appoint one of the candidates to the vacant office. This motion must be supported by a majority of the City Council. If the motion fails, the nominations shall continue in order until a motion is supported by a majority of the City Council.

G. Appointment and Swearing In. Upon the affirmative vote of the City Council, the selected individual may be sworn in during that meeting or the City Council may direct the swearing in of the candidate to take place at a future City Council meeting. The newly appointed City Councilmember shall be eligible to take part in City Council meetings after being sworn into office.

There is no standard policy for appointment of someone to the City Council and the City Council has discretion to establish an appointment process. Adopting a process for appointment would eliminate any uncertainty for both the City Council and potential candidates on how an appointment to a City Council seat would be conducted when a vacancy occurs.

Impact on City Resources
The adoption of this resolution has no impact on City resources. However, as of August 2022, the estimated cost of consolidated election services for one City Councilmember seat is approximately between $12,100 and $14,533.

Environmental Review
The proposed actions would be exempt from environmental review as the adoption of the proposed resolution does not qualify as a “project” pursuant to Public Resource Code Section 21065 and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Sections 15320, 15378 and 15061(b)(3), since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that adoption of the resolution would cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.

Public Notice
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with the agenda items being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

Attachments
A. Resolution
Report prepared by:

Nira Doherty, City Attorney
Report reviewed by:

Justin Murphy, City Manager
Judi A. Herren, Assistant to the City Manager/City Clerk Page G-6.3
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF MENLO PARK ESTABLISHING A

PROCESS FOR APPOINTMENT OF CANDIDATES TO CITY COUNCIL SEATS

IN ORDER TO FILL A VACANCY ON THE CITY COUNCIL
WHEREAS, on the twentieth day of September, 2022 the City Council of the City of Menlo Park adopted Ordinance No. XXXX, amending Menlo Park Municipal Code Section 2.04.190 pertaining to the filling of City Council vacancies to conform to the process identified in Government Code Section 36512; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to establish via Resolution a process that shall be utilized in the event of a vacancy on the City Council and the City Council decides to appoint someone to a City Council seat in accordance with Section 2.04.190 and Government Code Section 36512.

NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MENLO PARK DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Recitals. The City Council hereby finds that the foregoing recitals are a true and accurate and are incorporated herein by reference.

Section 2. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Determination. This action is exempt from environmental review as the adoption of this resolution does not qualify as a “project” pursuant to Public Resource Code Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15320, 15378 and 15061(b)(3), since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that adoption of this Resolution would cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.

Section 3. Process for Appointment.

A. Upon determination that the City Council desires to appoint someone to a vacant City Council seat, the City Clerk shall publish a notice of the vacancy in a newspaper of general circulation, advertise in local online media and social media, and post on the City’s website at least two weeks prior to the meeting at which the City Council will consider candidates to fill a vacated position. The City Clerk may also develop an application to be submitted by the candidates.

B. The notice shall provide:

1. The District in which the City Council vacancy has occurred;

2. The date, time, and place of the meeting where the City Council will conduct interviews and appoint a candidate to fill the vacancy;

3. The deadline for submitting an interested person’s name and other identified information or application prepared by the City Clerk; and

4. Information about the Questionnaire identified in Section C below and where a copy of the Questionnaire may be obtained.

C. An individual who is interested in filling the vacancy shall be requested to provide written answers to questions, which are attached hereto as Exhibit A (“Questionnaire”) on the date specified by the City Clerk so that the Questionnaire can be included in the agenda package and made public for the meeting at which the City Council conducts interviews of City Council candidates. If the Questionnaire is not provided on or before the date specified by the City Clerk, the candidate shall not be interviewed by the City Council and shall not be eligible for appointment to the City Council.

Page G-6.4 ATTACHMENT A
Resolution No. XXXX

D. Qualified Candidates. The City Clerk shall review the submittals from the candidates to ensure that each candidate resides in the District where the vacancy has occurred and has submitted all required documents to confirm that the candidate is a qualified candidate (“Qualified Candidates”).

E. Interviews of Qualified Candidates shall take place during a regular or special City Council meeting, as determined appropriate by the Mayor and the City Manager. The following procedures shall govern the interview process:

1. Order of Interview. Prior to commencement of the interviews, candidates shall be placed in a random drawing to determine the order in which candidates are interviewed.

2. Introductions. Candidates shall each be allotted five minutes to introduce themselves to the City Council. Time limits shall be strictly enforced during this phase of the interview.

Candidates may all be present at the same time that another candidate is being interviewed.

3. Questions. To ensure equal opportunity and standardization, each City Councilmember will have an opportunity to ask questions of the candidates from the list of questions in the Questionnaire and follow-up questions to responses that the candidate provided to the Questionnaire.

4. Public Comment. The City Council shall hear from members of the public after the City Council has asked all questions of the candidates.

5. Discussion. The City Council shall have the opportunity to discuss and deliberate the candidates.

F. Election by Motion. At the conclusion of discussion, the city clerk will ask each City Councilmember for their nominations. The candidate that receives the most nominations will be brought up for a motion and vote on appointment to the vacant office. If no candidate receives more nominations than any other candidate, any City Councilmember may move to appoint one of the candidates to the vacant office. If the motion to appoint fails, the nominations shall continue until a motion is supported by a majority of the City Council. A motion to appoint must be supported by a majority of the City Council in order for an appointment to be made.

G. Appointment and Swearing In. Upon the affirmative vote of the City Council, the selected individual may be sworn in during that meeting or the City Council may direct the swearing in of the candidate to take place at a future City Council meeting. The newly appointed City Councilmember shall be eligible to take part in City Council meetings after being sworn into office.

Section 4. Effective Date of Resolution. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.

Section 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining portions of this Resolution shall nonetheless remain in full force and effect. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions of this Resolution be declared invalid or unenforceable.
//
//
//
Page G-6.5
Resolution No. XXXX

I, Judi A. Herren, City Clerk of Menlo Park, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing City Council Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted at a meeting by said City Council on the twentieth day of September, 2022, by the following votes:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Official Seal of said City on this __ day of September, 2022.

Judi A. Herren, City Clerk
Exhibits:

A. Questionnaire
Page G-6.6
Resolution No. XXXX

QUESTIONNAIRE
Please answer the following questions.

1. Have you ever held a public office? If yes, name the office title, dates of service and describe the duties.

2. Please describe your qualifications, education and work experience/training that you believe would be relevant in your role as a City Councilmember.

3. What has your previous involvement with the City of Menlo Park? Please include any service organizations or community engagement in which you have participated.

4. Are you aware of the time commitment and the responsibilities associated with serving as a City Councilmember and are you prepared to serve without reservation?

5. Do you have any duties or responsibilities that would conflict with the duties of a City Councilmember?

6. Please describe the top three immediate issues that you think the City Council needs to address in Menlo Park.

7. Please describe the top three long-term issues that you think the City Council needs to address in Menlo Park.

8. What improvements do you think can be made in the City of Menlo Park?

9. Why do you think you are qualified to be appointed to the vacant City Council seat?

10. Is there anything else you would like to share with the City Council? Page G-6.7 EXHIBIT A
City Manager's Office

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org

STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 9/20/2022
Staff Report Number: 22-182-CC
Consent Calendar: Adopt a resolution amending City Council Policy CC-22-004 Commissions/Committees Policies and
Procedures, Roles and Responsibilities
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution (Attachment A) amending City Council Policy CC-22-004 Commissions/Committees Policies and Procedures, Roles and Responsibilities (CC-22-004.) Policy Issues
According to CC-22-004, advisory body regular meetings shall have a fixed date and time established by the advisory body. Changes to the established regular dates and times are subject to the approval of the City Council.

Background
On July 13, the Complete Streets Commission voted unanimously (Commissioner King absent) to adjust the regular meeting start time to 6:30 p.m. from 7 p.m.

As part of the review of the CC-22-004, staff identified other provisions in need of updates to better reflect current policies and practices.

Analysis
Staff is proposing the following edits to CC-22-004 (Exhibit A to the resolution.) Background
• Update number of advisory bodies
• Update Anti-Harassment and Non-Discrimination Policy number • Policy update approved by City Council in 2021
• Update Travel, Meal, and Lodging Policy title and number • Policy update approved by City Council in 2019
Recommendations, requests and reports
• Update City Council agenda title to “Advisory Body Reports” The schedule of Commission/Committee meetings
• Update Complete Street Commission regular meeting start time to 6:30 p.m. • To take effect October 2022
AGENDA ITEM G-7 Page G-7.1
Staff Report #: 22-XXX-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org • Update Planning Commission regular meeting days to include “Monday” Application and selection process
• Remove application signature requirement
Attendance
• Remove references to superseded policies, agencies and practices Conflict of interest and disclosure requirements
• Update the conflict of interest code and disclosure requirements • Updates approved by City Council Resolution Nos. 6618 and 6688 Roles and Responsibilities
• Update Complete Street Commission roles and responsibilities • Last updated 2019
• Update Housing Commission roles and responsibilities
• Last updated 2018
Throughout policy
• Update the use of pronouns
Impact on City Resources
There is no impact on City resources associated with the earlier start time for the Complete Street Commission.

Environmental Review
This action is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines §§ 15378 and 15061(b)(3) as it will not result in any direct or indirect physical change in the environment.

Public Notice
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with the agenda items being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

Attachments
A. Resolution
Report prepared by:

Judi A. Herren, Assistant to the City Manager/City Clerk Page G-7.2
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MENLO PARK APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO CITY COUNCIL POLICY CC-22-004

COMMISSIONS/COMMITTEES POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, ROLES AND

RESPONSIBILITIES
WHEREAS, the current regular meeting start time of the Complete Streets Commission is 7 p.m.; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to update the Complete Street Commission regular meeting start time from 7 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.

WHEREAS, the City Council approves the following amendments to City Council Policy CC-22- 004 Commissions/Committees Policies and Procedures, Roles and Responsibilities:
• Update number of advisory bodies
• Update Anti-Harassment and Non-Discrimination Policy number • Update Travel, Meal, and Lodging Policy title and number • Update City Council agenda title to “Advisory Body Reports” • Update the use of pronouns
• Update Complete Street Commission regular meeting start time to 6:30 p.m. • Update Planning Commission regular meeting days to include “Monday” • Remove application signature requirement
• Remove references to superseded policies, agencies, and practices • Update the conflict of interest code and disclosure requirements • Update Complete Street Commission roles and responsibilities • Update Housing Commission roles and responsibilities
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED, that City Council Policy CC-22-004 Commissions/Committees Policies and Procedures, Roles and Responsibilities is hereby amended, as set forth in Exhibit A.

I, Judi A. Herren, City Clerk of Menlo Park, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing City Council Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted at a meeting by said City Council on the twentieth of September, 2022, by the following votes:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Official Seal of said City on this __ day of September, 2022.

Judi A. Herren, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT A Page G-7.3
Exhibits:

A. City Council Policy CC-22-004 Commissions/Committees Policies and Procedures, Roles and Responsibilities
Resolution No. XXXX

COMMISSIONS/COMMITTEES POLICIES AND

PROCEDURES, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
City Council Policy #CC-22-004
Adopted March 8September 13, 2022
Resolution No. 6718XXX
Purpose
To define policies and procedures and roles and responsibilities for Menlo Park appointed commissions and committees.

Authority
Upon its original adoption, this policy replaced the document known as “Organization of Advisory Commissions of the City of Menlo Park.”
Background
The City of Menlo Park currently has eight seven active Commissions and Committees. The active advisory bodies are:

Complete Streets Commission, Environmental Quality Commission, Finance and Audit Committee, Housing Commission, Library Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission, and Planning Commission. Those not specified in the City Code are established by City Council ordinance or resolution. Most of these advisory bodies are established in accordance with Resolution 2801 and its amendments. Within specific areas of responsibility, each advisory body has a primary role of advising the City Council on policy matters or reviewing specific issues and carrying out assignments as directed by the City Council or prescribed by law.

Seven Six of the eight seven commissions and committees listed above are advisory in nature. The Planning Commission is both advisory and regulatory and organized according to the City Code (Ch. 2.12) and State statute (Government Code 65100 et seq., 65300-65401).

The City has an adopted Anti-Harassment and Non-Discrimination Policy (CC-9521-0010022), and a Travel, Meal, and Lodging and Expense Policy (CC-9119-002), which are also applicable to all advisory bodies.

Policies and Procedures
Relationship to City Council, staff and media
• Upon referral by the City Council, the commission/committee shall study referred matters and return their recommendations and advise to the City Council. With each such referral, the City Council may authorize the City staff to provide certain designated services to aid in the study. • Upon its own initiative, the commission/committee shall identify and raise issues to the City Council’s attention and from time to time explore pertinent matters and make recommendations to the City Council. • At a request of a member of the public, the commission/committee may consider appeals from City actions or inactions in pertinent areas and, if deemed appropriate, report and make recommendations to the City Council. • Each commission/committee is required to develop an annual work plan which will be the foundation for the work performed by the advisory body in support of City Council annual work plan. The plan, once finalized by a majority of the commission/committee, will be formally presented to the City Council for direction and approval no later than September 30 of each year and then reported out on by a representative of the advisory body at a regularly scheduled City Council meeting at least annually, but recommended twice a year. The proposed work plan must align with the City Council’s adopted work plan. When modified, the work plan must be taken to the City Council for approval. The Planning Commission is exempt from this requirement as its functions are governed by the Menlo Park municipal code (Chapter 2.12) and State law (Government Code 65100 et seq, 65300-65401). • Commissions and committees shall not become involved in the administrative or operational matters of City departments. Members may not direct staff to initiate major programs, conduct large studies or establish department policy. City staff assigned to furnish staff services shall be available to provide general staff assistance, such as preparation of agenda/notice materials and minutes, general review of department programs and activities, and to perform limited studies, program reviews, and other services of a general staff nature.

Commissions/Committees may not establish department work programs or determine department program priorities. The responsibility for setting policy and allocating scarce City resources rests with the City’s duly elected representatives, the City Council.
• Additional or other staff support may be provided upon a formal request to the City Council. • The staff liaison shall act as the commission/committee’s lead representative to the media concerning matters before the commission/committee. Commission/Committee members should refer all media inquiries to their respective liaisons for response. Personal opinions and comments may be expressed so long as the commission/committee member clarifies that his or her statements do not represent the position of the City Council. • Commission/Committee members will have mandatory training every two years regarding the Brown Act and Resolution No. XXXX

COMMISSIONS/COMMITTEES POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES City Council Policy #CC-22-004 2
Adopted March 8September 13, 2022
Resolution No. 6718XXXX
parliamentary procedures, anti-harassment training, ethics training, and other training required by the City Council or State Law. The commission/committee members may have the opportunity for additional training, such as training for chair and vice chair. Failure to comply with the mandatory training will be reported to the City Council and may result in replacement of the member by the City Council. • Requests from commission/committee member(s) determined by the staff liaison to take one hour or more of staff time to complete, must be directed by the City Council.

Role of City Council commission/committee liaison
City Councilmembers are assigned to serve in a liaison capacity with one or more city commission/committee. The purpose of the liaison assignment is to facilitate communication between the City Council and the advisory body.

The liaison also helps to increase the City Council's familiarity with the membership, programs and issues of the advisory body. In fulfilling their liaison assignment, City Councilmembers may elect to attend commission/committee meetings periodically to observe the activities of the advisory body or simply maintain communication with the commission/committee chair on a regular basis.

City Councilmembers should be sensitive to the fact that they are not participating members of the commission/committee, but are there rather to create a linkage between the City Council and commission/committee. In interacting with commissions/committee, City Councilmembers are to reflect the views of the City Council as a body. Being a commission/committee liaison bestows no special right with respect to commission/committee business.

Typically, assignments to commission/committee liaison positons are made at the beginning of a City Council term in December. The Mayor will ask City Councilmembers which liaison assignments they desire and will submit recommendations to the full City Council regarding the various committees, boards, and commissions which City Councilmembers will represent as a liaison. In the rare instance where more than one City Councilmember wishes to be the appointed liaison to a particular commission, a vote of the City Council will be taken to confirm appointments.

City Staff Liaison
The City has designated staff to act as a liaison between the commission/committee and the City Council. The City shall provide staff services to the commission/committee which will include:
• Developing a rapport with the Chair and commission/committee members • Providing a schedule of meetings to the city clerk’s office and commission/committee members, arranging meeting locations, maintaining the minutes and other public records of the meeting, and preparing and distributing appropriate information related to the meeting agenda. • Advising the commission/committee on directions and priorities of the City Council. • Informing the commission/committee of events, activities, policies, programs, etc. occurring within the scope of the commission/committee’s function.
• Ensuring the city clerk is informed of all vacancies, expired terms, changes in offices, or any other changes to the commission/committee.
• Providing information to the appropriate appointed official including reports, actions, and recommendations of the committee/commission and notifying them of noncompliance by the commission/committee or chair with City policies.
• Ensuring that agenda items approved by the commission/committee are brought forth in a timely manner taking into consideration staff capacity, City Council priorities, the commission/committee work plan, and other practical matters such as the expense to conduct research or prepare studies, provided appropriate public notification, and otherwise properly prepare the item for commission/committee consideration. • Take action minutes; upon agreement of the commission, this task may be performed by one of the members (staff is still responsible for the accuracy and formatting of the minutes) • Maintain a minute book with signed minutes
Recommendations, requests and reports
As needed, near the beginning of City Council meetings, there will be an item called “Commission/CommitteeAdvisory Body Reports.” At this time, commissions/committees may present recommendations or status reports and may request direction and support from the City Council. Such requests shall be communicated to the staff liaison in advance, including any written materials, so that they may be listed on the agenda and distributed with the agenda packet. The Resolution No. XXXX

COMMISSIONS/COMMITTEES POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES City Council Policy #CC-22-004 3
Adopted March 8September 13, 2022
Resolution No. 6718XXXX
materials being provided to the City Council must be approved by a majority of the commission/committee at a commission/committee meeting before submittal to the City Council. The City Council will receive such reports and recommendations and, after suitable study and discussion, respond or give direction.

City Council referrals
The city clerk shall transmit to the designated staff liaison all referrals and requests from the City Council for advice and recommendations. The commissions/committees shall expeditiously consider and act on all referrals and requests made by the City Council and shall submit reports and recommendations to the City Council on these assignments.

Public appearance of commission/committee members
When a commission/committee member appears in a non-official, non-representative capacity before the public, for example, at a City Council meeting, the member shall indicate that he or shethey is are speaking only as an individual.

This also applies when interacting with the media and on social media. If the commission/committee member appears as the representative of an applicant or a member of the public, the Political Reform Act may govern this appearance.

In addition, in certain circumstances, due process considerations might apply to make a commission/committee member’s appearance inappropriate. Conversely, when a member who is present at a City Council meeting is asked to address the City Council on a matter, the member should represent the viewpoint of the particular commission/committee as a whole (not a personal opinion).

Disbanding of advisory body
Upon recommendation by the Chair or appropriate staff, any standing or special advisory body, established by the City Council and whose members were appointed by the City Council, may be declared disbanded due to lack of business, by majority vote of the City Council.

Meetings and officers

1. Agendas/notices/minutes
• All meetings shall be open and public and shall conduct business through published agendas, public notices and minutes and follow all of the Brown Act provisions governing public meetings. Special, canceled and adjourned meetings may be called when needed, subject to the Brown Act provisions. • Support staff for each commission/committee shall be responsible for properly noticing and posting all regular, special, canceled and adjourned meetings. Copies of all meeting agendas, notices and minutes shall be provided to the City Council, city manager, city attorney, city clerk and other appropriate staff, as requested. • Original agendas and minutes shall be filed and maintained by support staff in accordance with the City’s adopted records retention schedule.
• The official record of the commissions/committees will be preserved by preparation of action minutes.

2. Conduct and parliamentary procedures
• Unless otherwise specified by State law or City regulations, conduct of all meetings shall generally follow Robert’s Rules of Order.
• A majority of commission/committee members shall constitute a quorum and a quorum must be seated before official action is taken.
• The chair of each commission/committee shall preside at all meetings and the vice chair shall assume the duties of the chair when the chair is absent.
• The role of the commission/committee chair (according to Roberts Rules of Order): To open the session at the time at which the assembly is to meet, by taking the chair and calling the members to order; to announce the business before the assembly in the order in which it is to be acted upon; to recognize members entitled to the floor; to state and put to vote all questions which are regularly moved, or necessarily arise in the course of the proceedings, and to announce the result of the vote; to protect the assembly from annoyance from evidently frivolous or dilatory motions by refusing to recognize them; to assist in the expediting of business in every compatible with the rights of the members, as by allowing brief remarks when undebatable motions are pending, if s/he thinks it advisable; to restrain the members when engaged in debate, within the rules of order, to enforce on all occasions the observance of order and decorum among the members, deciding all questions of order (subject to an appeal to the assembly by any two members) unless when in doubt he prefers to submit the question for the decision of the assembly; to inform the assembly when necessary, or when referred to for the purpose, on a point of order to practice pertinent to pending business; to authenticate by his/her signature, when necessary, all the acts, orders, and proceedings of the assembly declaring it will and in all things obeying its commands.

Resolution No. XXXX

COMMISSIONS/COMMITTEES POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES City Council Policy #CC-22-004 4
Adopted March 8September 13, 2022
Resolution No. 6718XXXX

3. Lack of a quorum
• When a lack of a quorum exists at the start time of a meeting, those present will wait 15 minutes for additional members to arrive. If after 15 minutes a quorum is still not present, the meeting will be adjourned by the staff liaison due to lack of a quorum. Once the meeting is adjourned it cannot be reconvened. • The public is not allowed to address those commissioners present during the 15 minutes the commission/committee is waiting for additional members to arrive. • Staff can make announcements to the members during this time but must follow up with an email to all members of the body conveying the same information.
• All other items shall not be discussed with the members present as it is best to make the report when there is a quorum present.

4. Meeting locations and dates
• Meetings shall be held in designated City facilities, as noticed. • All commissions/committees with the exception of the Planning Commission, and Finance and Audit Committee shall conduct regular meetings once a month. Special meetings may also be scheduled as required by the commission/committee. The Planning Commission shall hold regular meetings twice a month and the Finance and Audit Committee shall hold quarterly meetings. • Monthly regular meetings shall have a fixed date and time established by the commission/committee. Changes to the established regular dates and times are subject to the approval of the City Council. An exception to this rule would include any changes necessitated to fill a temporary need in order for the commission/committee to conduct its meeting in a most efficient and effective way as long as proper and adequate notification is provided to the City Council and made available to the public.

The schedule of Commission/Committee meetings is as follows:
• Complete Streets Commission – Every second Wednesday at 7 6:30 p.m. • Environmental Quality Commission – Every third Wednesday at 6:00 p.m. • Finance and Audit Committee – Third Wednesday of every quarter at 5:30 p.m., • Housing Commission – Every first Wednesday at 6:30 p.m. • Library Commission – Every third Monday at 6:30 p.m.
• Parks and Recreation Commission – Every fourth Wednesday at 6:30 p.m. • Planning Commission – Twice a month on a Monday at 7 p.m.

Each commission/committee may establish other operational policies subject to the approval of the City Council.

Any changes to the established policies and procedures shall be subject to the approval of the City Council.

5. Off-premises meeting participation
While technology allows commission/committee members to participate in meetings from a location other than the meeting location (referred to as “off-premises”), off-premises participation is discouraged given the logistics required to ensure compliance with the Brown Act and experience with technological failures disrupting the meeting. In the event that a commission/committee member believes that his or her participation is essential to a meeting, the following shall apply:
• Any commission/committee member intending to participate from an off-premise location shall inform the staff liaison at least two weeks in advance of the meeting.
• The off-premise location must be identified in the notice and agenda of the meeting. • Agendas must be posted at the off-premise location.
• The off-premise location must be accessible to the public and be ADA compliant. • The commission/committee member participating at a duly noticed off-premises location does not count toward the quorum necessary to convene a meeting of the commission/committee. • For any one meeting, no more than one commission/committee member may participate from an off-premise location.
• All votes must be by roll call.

6. Selection of chair and vice chair
• The chair and vice chair shall be selected in May of each year by a majority of the members and shall serve for one year or until their successors are selected.
• Each commission/committee shall annually rotate its chair and vice chair.

Resolution No. XXXX

COMMISSIONS/COMMITTEES POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES City Council Policy #CC-22-004 5
Adopted March 8September 13, 2022
Resolution No. 6718XXXX
G. Memberships
Appointments/Oaths
• The City Council is the appointing body for all commissions/committees. All members serve at the pleasure of the City Council for designated terms.
• All appointments and reappointments shall be made at a regularly scheduled City Council meeting, and require an affirmative vote of not less than a majority of the City Council present. • Before taking office, all members must complete an Oath of Allegiance required by Article XX, §3, of the Constitution of the State of California. All oaths are administered by the city clerk or his/her designee. • Appointments made during the middle of the term are for the unexpired portion of that term.

Application and selection process
• The application process begins when a vacancy occurs due to term expiration, resignation, removal or death of a member.
• The application period will normally run for a period of four weeks from the date the vacancy occurs. If there is more than one concurrent vacancy in a Commission, the application period may be extended. Applications are available from the city clerk’s office and on the City’s website. • The city clerk shall notify members whose terms are about to expire whether or not they would be eligible for reappointment. If reappointment is sought, an updated application will be required. • Applicants are required to complete and return the application form for each commission/committee they desire to serve on, along with any additional information they would like to transmit, by the established deadline.

Applications sent by email are accepted; however, the form submitted must be signed. • After the deadline of receipt of applications, the city clerk shall schedule the matter at the next available regular City Council meeting. All applications received will be submitted and made a part of the City Council agenda packet for their review and consideration. If there are no applications received by the deadline, the city clerk will extend the application period for an indefinite period of time until sufficient applications are received. • Upon review of the applications received, the City Council reserves the right to schedule or waive interviews, or to extend the application process in the event insufficient applications are received. In either case, the city clerk will provide notification to the applicants of the decision of the City Council. • If an interview is requested, the date and time will be designated by the City Council. Interviews are open to the public.
• The selection/appointment process by the City Council shall be conducted at a City Council meeting. The city clerk will ask each City Councilmember for their nominations; the number of nominations is limited to the number of vacancies. The candidate that receives a majority of nominations will be appointed. If there is a tie, multiple rounds of voting will occur.
• Following a City Council appointment, the city clerk shall notify successful and unsuccessful applicants accordingly, in writing. Appointees will receive copies of the City’s Non-Discrimination and Sexual Harassment policies, and disclosure statements for those members who are required to file under State law as designated in the City’s Conflict of Interest Code. Copies of the notification will also be distributed to support staff and the commission/committee chair.
• An orientation will be scheduled by the city clerk following an appointment (but before taking office) and a copy of this policy document will be provided at that time.

Attendance
• An Attendance Policy (CC-91-001), shall apply to all advisory bodies. Provisions of this policy are listed below. • A compilation of attendance will be submitted to the City Council at least annually listing absences for all commissions/committee members.
• Absences, which result in attendance at less than two-thirds of their meetings during the calendar year, will be reported to the City Council and may result in replacement of the member by the City Council. • Any member who feels that unique circumstances have led to numerous absences can appeal directly to the City Council for a waiver of this policy or to obtain a leave of absence. • While it is expected that members be present at all meetings, the chair and staff liaison should be notified if a member knows in advance that he/shethey will be absent. • When reviewing commissioners for reappointment, overall attendance at full commission meetings will be given significant consideration.

Resolution No. XXXX

COMMISSIONS/COMMITTEES POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES City Council Policy #CC-22-004 6
Adopted March 8September 13, 2022
Resolution No. 6718XXXX
Compensation
• Members shall serve without compensation (unless specifically provided) for their services, provided, however, members shall receive reimbursement for necessary travel expenses and other expenses incurred on official duty when such expenditures have been authorized by the City Council (See Policy CC-9119-002).

Conflict of interest and disclosure requirements
• A Conflict of Interest Code has been updated and adopted by the City Council and the Community Development Agency pursuant to Government Code §87300 et seq. Copies of the conflict of interest code are filed with the city clerk. Pursuant to the adopted Conflict of Interest Code, members serving on the Complete Streets Commission, Housing Commission, and Planning Commission are required to file a Statement of Economic Interest with the city clerk to disclose personal interest in investments, real property and income. This is done within 30 days of appointment and annually thereafter. A statement is also required within 30 days after leaving office.
• If a public official has a conflict of interest, the Political Reform Act may require the official to disqualify himself or herself from making or participating in a governmental decision, or using his or her official position to influence a governmental decision. Questions in this regard may be directed to the city attorney. • In accordance with Resolution No. 6622, current and future members of the Complete Streets Commission and Housing Commission, are required to report any and all real property in Menlo Park for impacting land use, real property, and the housing element.

Qualifications, compositions, number
• In most cases, members shall be residents of the City of Menlo Park and at least 18 years of age. • Current members of any other City commission/committee are disqualified for membership, unless the regulations for that advisory body permit concurrent membership. Commission/Committee members are strongly advised to serve out the entirety of the term of their current appointment before seeking appointment on another commission/committee.
• Commission/Committee members shall be permitted to retain membership while seeking any elective office.

However, members shall not use the meetings, functions or activities of such bodies for purposes of campaigning for elective office.
• There shall be seven (7) members on each commission/committee with the exception of:
• Complete Streets Commission – nine (9) members
• Finance and Audit Committee – seven (7) members
Reappointments, resignations, removals
• Incumbents seeking a reappointment are required to complete and file an application with the city clerk by the application deadline. No person shall be reappointed to a commission/committee who has served on that same body for two consecutive terms; unless a period of one year has lapsed since the returning member last served on that commission/committee (the one-year period is flexible subject to City Council’s discretion). • Resignations must be submitted in writing to the city clerk, who will distribute copies to City Council and appropriate staff.
• The City Council may remove a member by a majority vote of the City Council without cause, notice or hearing.

Term of office
• Unless specified otherwise, the term of office for all commission/committee shall be four (4) years unless a resignation or a removal has taken place. The Finance and Audit Committee term of office shall be two (2) years.
• If a person is appointed to fill an unexpired term and serves less than two years, that time will not be considered a full term. However, if a person is appointed to fill an unexpired term and serves two years or more, that time will be considered a full term.
• Terms are staggered to be overlapping four-year terms, so that all terms do not expire in any one year. • If a member resigns before the end of his/hertheir term, a replacement serves out the remainder of that term.

Vacancies
• Vacancies are created due to term expirations, resignations, removals or death. • Vacancies are listed on the City Council agenda and posted by the city clerk in the City Council Chambers bulletin board and on the city website.

Resolution No. XXXX

COMMISSIONS/COMMITTEES POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES City Council Policy #CC-22-004 7
Adopted March 8September 13, 2022
Resolution No. 6718XXXX
• Whenever an unscheduled vacancy occurs in any commission/committee, a special vacancy notice shall be posted within 20 days after the vacancy occurs. Appointment shall not be made for at least 10 working days after posting of the notice (Government Code 54974).
• On or before December 31 of each year, an appointment list of all regular advisory commissions/committees of the City Council shall be prepared by the city clerk and posted in the City Council Chambers bulletin board and on the City’s website. This list is also available to the public. (Government Code 54972, Maddy Act).

Roles and Responsibilities
Complete Streets Commission
The Complete Streets Commission is charged primarily with advising the City Council on realizing the City's adopted goals for complete streets, vision zero, climate action plan, and provide input on major land use and development projects as it relates to transportationmulti-modal transportation issues according to the goals and policies of the City’s general plan. This includes strategies to encourage safe travel, improve accessibility, and maintaining a functional and efficient transportation network for all modes and persons traveling within and around the City. The Complete Streets Commission's responsibilities would include:
• To advance the goals of the city’s newly adopted climate action plan by making alternatives to driving safer and more attractiveCoordination of multi-modal (motor vehicle, bicycle, transit and pedestrian) transportation facilities
• Advise City Council on the implementation of the transportation master plan. • Continue to advocate for and advise the City Council on planning and installing pedestrian and bicycle rail crossing and safe cycling/pedestrian infrastructure.
• Continue to support City Council in ongoing initiatives to improve access to Downtown and support downtown businesses.
• Continue to support the implementation of the Safe Routes to School strategy and advocate for community engagement, program continuity and engineering implementation. • Continue to support City Council’s role as a stakeholder with regard to regional multi-modal and transportation demand management programs projects to increaseAdvising City Council on ways to encourage vehicle, multimodal, pedestrian and bicycle safety and accessibility for the City supporting the goals of the General Plan • Coordination on providing a citywide safe routes to school plan • Coordination with regional transportation systems
• Establishing parking restrictions and requirements according to Municipal Code sections 11.24.026 through

11.24.028
Environmental Quality Commission
The Environmental Quality Commission is charged primarily with advising the City Council on matters involving environmental protection, improvement and sustainability. Specific focus areas include:
• Preserving heritage trees
• Using best practices to maintain city trees
• Preserving and expanding the urban canopy
• Making determinations on appeals of heritage tree removal permits • Administering annual Environmental Quality Awards program • Organizing annual Arbor Day Event; typically, a tree planting event • Advising on programs and policies related to protection of natural areas, recycling and waste reduction, environmentally sustainable practices, air and water pollution prevention, climate protection, and water and energy conservation.

Finance and Audit Committee
The Finance and Audit Committee is charged primarily to support delivery of timely, clear and comprehensive reporting of the City’s fiscal status to the community at large. Specific focus areas include:
• Review the process for periodic financial reporting to the City Council and the public, as needed • Review financial audit and annual financial report with the City’s external auditors • Review of the resolution of prior year audit findings • Review of the auditor selection process and scope, as needed Housing Commission
The Housing Commission is charged primarily with advising the City Council on housing matters including housing Resolution No. XXXX

COMMISSIONS/COMMITTEES POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES City Council Policy #CC-22-004 8
Adopted March 8September 13, 2022
Resolution No. 6718XXXX
supply and housing related problems. Specific focus areas include:
• Community attitudes about housing (range, distribution, racial, social-economic problems) • Programs for evaluating, maintaining, and upgrading the distribution and quality of housing stock in the City • Planning, implementing and evaluating City programs under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974
• Members serve with staff on a loan review committee for housing rehabilitation programs and a first time homebuyer loan program
• Review and recommend to the City Council regarding the Below Market Rate (BMR) program • Initiate, review and recommend on housing policies and programs for the City • Review and recommend on housing related impacts for environmental impact reports • Review and recommend on State and regional housing issues • Review and recommend on the Housing Element of the General Plan • The five most senior members of the Housing Commission also serve as the members of the Relocation Appeals Board (City Resolution 4290, adopted June 25, 1991).

Library Commission
The Library Commission is charged primarily with advising the City Council on matters related to the maintenance and operation of the City’s libraries and library systems. Specific focus areas include:
• The scope and degree of library activities
• Maintenance and protection of City libraries
• Evaluation and improvement of library service
• Acquisition of library materials
• Coordination with other library systems and long range planning • Literacy and ESL programs
Parks and Recreation Commission
The Parks and Recreation Commission is charged primarily with advising the City Council on matters related to City programs and facilities dedicated to recreation. Specific focus areas include:
• Those programs and facilities established primarily for the participation of and/or use by residents of the City, including adequacy and maintenance of such facilities as parks and playgrounds, recreation buildings, facilities and equipment
• Adequacy, operation and staffing of recreation programs • Modification of existing programs and facilities to meet developing community needs • Long range planning and regional coordination concerning park and recreational facilities Planning Commission
The Planning Commission is organized according to State Statute. • The Planning Commission reviews development proposals on public and private lands for compliance with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
• The Commission reviews all development proposals requiring a use permit, architectural control, variance, minor subdivision and environmental review associated with these projects. The Commission is the final decision-making body for these applications, unless appealed to the City Council. • The Commission serves as a recommending body to the City Council for major subdivisions, rezoning’s, conditional development permits, Zoning Ordinance amendments, General Plan amendments and the environmental reviews and Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing Agreements associated with those projects. • The Commission works on special projects as assigned by the City Council.

Special Advisory Bodies
The City Council has the authority to create standing committees, task forces or subcommittees for the City, and from time to time, the City Council may appoint members to these groups. The number of persons and the individual appointee serving on each group may be changed at any time by the City Council. There are no designated terms for members of these groups; members are appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the City Council.

Any requests of city commissions or committees to create such ad hoc advisory bodies shall be submitted in writing to the city clerk for City Council consideration and approval.

Resolution No. XXXX

COMMISSIONS/COMMITTEES POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES City Council Policy #CC-22-004 9
Adopted March 8September 13, 2022
Resolution No. 6718XXXX
Procedure history
Action Date Notes
Procedure adoption 1991 Resolution No. 3261
Procedure adoption 2001
Procedure adoption 2011
Procedure adoption 2013 Resolution No. 6169
Procedure adoption 2017 Resolution No. 6377
Procedure adoption 6/8/2021 Resolution No. 6631
Procedure adoption 3/1/2022 Resolution No. 6706
Procedure adoption 3/8/2022 Resolution No. 6718
Procedure adoption 9/20/2022 Resolution No. XXXX
Resolution No. XXXX

Community Development

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org

STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 9/20/2022
Staff Report Number: 22-183-CC
Consent Calendar: Authorize the city manager to enter into a contract with ICF Jones and Stokes Inc. to prepare an
environmental impact report for the proposed
master plan project at 333 Ravenswood Avenue
(Parkline) for the amount of $688,817 and future
augments as may be necessary to complete the
environmental review for the proposed project
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the city manager to execute the contract, attached hereto as Attachment A, with ICF Jones and Stokes Inc. (ICF) for the amount of $688,817 and future augments as may be necessary to complete the environmental review for the proposed Parkline project based on the proposed scope and budget (Attachment B.)
Policy Issues
City Council Resolution No. 6479 authorizes the city manager to execute agreements necessary to conduct City business up to a stated award authority level which adjusts annually based on changes in the construction cost index. The current award authority is $86,000. While the project applicant is responsible for the full cost of preparing the environmental impact report (EIR) for a project, and no taxpayer funds are being used for said purpose, the City Council retains discretion for all agreements exceeding the award authority delegated to the city manager.

The City Council will be the decision-making body for the EIR, general plan amendment, zoning ordinance amendment, and rezoning to allow the proposed mix of uses and densities/intensities requested by the applicant, and the conditional development permit to enable comprehensive planning of the project. The City Council will also be the acting body on the development agreement, which would provide vested rights in exchange for community benefits, and the vesting tentative map to merge the existing lots and resubdivide in a manner consistent with the proposed improvements. The Planning Commission will be the acting body for architectural control for all proposed new buildings and the recommending body on all other entitlements.

Authorizing the city manager to enter into a contract with ICF would allow the City to conduct the environmental review for the project proposal. Approval of the environmental review contract does not imply an endorsement of a project, but rather initiates the process to identify potential environmental impacts of the project for consideration during entitlement review. The policy implications of the project proposal are considered on a case-by-case basis, and will be informed by additional analysis as the project review proceeds.

AGENDA ITEM G-8 Page G-8.1
Staff Report #: 22-183-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org Background
SRI International (formerly known as the Stanford Research Institute) is an independent, nonprofit research institute located on an approximately 63-acre campus at 333 Ravenswood Avenue. In October 2021, the City received an application from Lane Partners, LLC for a master plan development to comprehensively redevelop the SRI campus with a residential, office, research and development (R&D), and retail mixed-use project. Initial plans indicate the project would be divided into an approximately 53-acre office/R&D/life sciences campus and a 10-acre residential area along the Laurel Street edge of the project site extending slightly down Ravenswood Avenue. Site circulation, open space and landscape (other than retained trees) would be redesigned and rebuilt per a new comprehensive campus plan, including new bicycle and pedestrian connections. There would be no net increase of non-residential square footage. Primary program elements include:
• Approximately 284,000 square feet of existing office/R&D (retained in Buildings P, S and T); • Approximately 1.1 million square feet of new office/R&D in five main structures, three to five stories in height, along with a smaller amenity building;
• Three new parking structures for the non-residential uses; • Four hundred (400) residential rental units (19 townhomes at two stories) and (381 apartments at three to five stories) in approximately 500,000 square feet of floor area; • Twenty-five (25) acres of landscaped, publicly-accessible open space, including a large central open space between office/R&D buildings;
• A sports field and one-story community building adjacent to the Ravenswood Avenue/Middlefield Road intersection; and
• Paths, landscaping and other site improvements.

In order to meet identified needs of Menlo Park Municipal Water, staff intends to explore a possible partnership with Parkline to evaluate opportunities for emergency water supply and/or storage facilities onsite, such as an emergency water supply well or underground reservoir with open space/fields above.

Select project plan sheets are included as Attachment C and a location map is included as Attachment D.

On June 22, 2021, the Applicant gave an introductory presentation on the project to the City Council, while the project was in the pre-application stage. The Planning Commission and City Council held study sessions for the proposed project, February 14, 2022 and May 10, 2022, respectively and provided initial feedback. The applicant is currently working on revised plans to address comments received, including a desire for studying additional housing.

Environmental review process overview
One of the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is to inform decision makers and the public about the potential significant environmental effects of a proposed project. For purposes of CEQA, the environment includes the physical conditions within the area that could be affected by a proposed project, such as land, air, water, plants and animals, noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic significance. An EIR must be prepared whenever it is established that a proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment. The EIR will not only provide information about potentially significant environmental impacts, but also identify ways in which the significant effects of the proposed project might be minimized and identify alternatives to the proposed project. The main substantive components of an EIR are as follows:
• The project description, which discloses the activity that is proposed for approval; • Discussion and analysis of significant environmental effects of the proposed project, including cumulative impacts and growth-inducing impacts;
Page G-8.2
Staff Report #: 22-183-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org • Discussion of ways to mitigate or avoid the proposed project’s significant environmental impacts; and • Discussion of alternatives to the project as proposed.

Following City Council approval of the EIR consultant contract, the City will issue a notice of preparation (NOP), which signifies to public agencies and the public that the City plans to prepare an EIR for the proposed project. The notice is designed to seek comments from interested agencies and members of the public on the scope and content of the EIR.

The release of the NOP begins the process for agency and early public consultation, which is referred to as the “scoping” process. The scoping process is designed to enable the City to determine the scope and contents of the EIR at an early stage, including identifying possible issues to be studied, topic areas that do not warrant additional study based on specifics of the proposed project, and possible alternatives and mitigation measures to be analyzed and considered in the EIR. As part of the scoping process, the Planning Commission would hold a public meeting or scoping session for the EIR for the proposed project. The scoping session is an opportunity for the Planning Commission and public to provide comments on the scope and content in the EIR. Oral comments received during the scoping session and written comments received during the NOP comment period on the scope and content of the environmental review will be considered while preparing the draft EIR.

Following review of the comments received during the scoping process, a draft EIR would be prepared and processed in accordance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines in effect at the time of the release of the NOP. Upon release of the draft EIR, there is an opportunity for agencies and the public to comment on the analysis in the draft EIR. The comments received during the draft EIR review period are considered and responded to in the final EIR, which also is released for public review. The City Council, as the final decision-making body for the proposed project, will review and determine if the EIR can be certified as compliant with CEQA’s legal requirements. Certification of the EIR as legally compliant with CEQA requirements must be completed before action on the proposed project and does not indicate approval of the project.

Project-specific studies
The scope includes preparation of an optional, project-specific Housing Needs Assessment (HNA) to inform the population and housing topic area as well as well as to provide decision makers with additional information regarding the project’s potential impacts on housing. The City Council may wish to provide input on whether preparation of an HNA is desired. The scope also includes an optional Water Supply Assessment (WSA.) As staff receives additional information on the project, it will make a final determination on whether a HNA and/or WSA is needed.

A fiscal impact analysis (FIA) will also be prepared but will be under a separate scope and budget, which will be reviewed and authorized by the city manager or the City Council, depending on the estimated cost.

Analysis
As part of the EIR consultant selection process, staff typically requests proposals from multiple environmental consulting firms. For the proposed project, staff released a request for proposals (RFP) to 12 firms and received proposals from four firms: Dudek, Rincon Consultants Inc.(Rincon), LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) and ICF. All four firms selected subconsultants to prepare the HNA and/or other studies and EIR topic areas depending on the qualifications and capabilities of the prime environmental consultant. A brief comparison of the scopes is provided in Table 1 below.

Page G-8.3
Staff Report #: 22-183-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org Table 1: Comparison of project EIR scopes and budgets
Firm Subconsultants Experience/Other key factors Project total cost Dudek BAE Urban
Economics
Projects referenced in scope are smaller in scale and
complexity than applicant's project. Proposed project
manager has experience with two smaller scale EIR
projects in Bayfront Area. Proposed deputy project
manager has EIR preparation experience in City.
$344,350
Rincon
Kyser Marston
Assoc.; Hexagon
Transportation
Projects referenced in scope did not include Master Plan Developments. Proposed project manager has
experience with EIR preparation for three projects in
City.
$454,799
LSA
Kyser Marston
Assoc.; Hexagon
Transportation;
Baseline
Environmental;
Environmental
Vision
Projects references in scope are of a similar level of
scale and complexity to applicant's project. Proposed
principal-in-charge/project manager has experience with three larger scale project EIR's in City.
$554,621
ICF
Kyser Marston
Assoc.; Hexagon
Transportation;
West Yost
Projects referenced in scope are of a similar level of
scale and complexity to applicant's project. ICF is
currently working on Willow Village Master Plan EIR and has additional EIR preparation experience for projects in City. ICF also prepared previous analyses for SRI
before Parkline submittal.
$658,817 to $688,817
The four scopes are included in this staff report as Attachments B, E, F and G.

City staff evaluated the four scopes and reviewed them with the applicant team, who is responsible for the full cost of the preparation of the environmental analysis under CEQA. Staff and the applicant team believe LSA and ICF both have the necessary experience. However, staff recommends that the City Council select ICF for the EIR contract for the following reasons:

1. ICF has extensive experience preparing CEQA documents for cities throughout the Bay Area and prepared analysis for SRI on a previous proposal, which SRI chose not pursue;

2. ICF has experience working on Willow Village, another master plan project in Menlo Park; and

3. Although the proposed budget is more expensive than the others, the ICF proposal includes preparation of a WSA that the other proposals did not include.

Staff has shared its recommendation of ICF with the applicant, who agrees with the recommendation. It should be noted, the scope also includes studying a variant for up to 600 housing units to address initial comments received at the Planning Commission and City Council study sessions.

As part of the initial stages of the environmental and entitlement analysis, it may be determined that additional technical analyses are required; therefore, staff is recommending that the City Council provide the city manager the authority to approve future contract augmentations, if needed. The draft contract indicating ICF as the primary consultant and the proposed budget is included as Attachment A.

Page G-8.4
Staff Report #: 22-183-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 www.menlopark.org Impact on City Resources
The applicant is required to pay all planning, building and public works permit fees, based on the City’s master fee schedule, to fully cover the cost of staff time spent on the review of the project. The applicant is also required to bear the cost of the environmental review. For the environmental review and other supporting studies required by the City, the applicant deposits money with the City and the City pays the consultants. Notwithstanding, the scope and content of the EIR is determined by the City in its sole discretion and the City is the final decision maker on the adequacy of the document.

Environmental Review
An EIR will be prepared for the proposed project evaluating all applicable topic areas required under CEQA.

As described above, the EIR will analyze the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project.

Public Notice
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with the agenda items being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

Attachments
A. Consultant services agreement with ICF
B. EIR scope and budget proposal from ICF
C. Project plans (select sheets)
D. Location map
E. EIR scope and budget proposal from Dudek
F. EIR scope and budget proposal from Rincon
G. EIR scope and budget proposal from LSA
Report prepared by:

Corinna Sandmeier, Acting Principal Planner
Report reviewed by:

Deanna Chow, Assistant Community Development Director
Page G-8.5
1 CC Rev 20210301

CONSULTANT AGREEMENT
City Manager’s Office
701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025
tel 650-330-6620
Agreement #:

AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES BETWEEN
THE CITY OF MENLO PARK AND ICF JONES AND STOKES, INC.

THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into at Menlo Park, California, this _____________________, by and between the CITY OF MENLO PARK, a Municipal Corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY," and ICF JONES AND STOKES, INC., hereinafter referred to as “FIRST PARTY.” WITNESSETH:

WHEREAS, Lane Partners, LLC, propose a master plan development to comprehensively redevelop the SRI campus with a residential, office, research and development (R&D), and retail mixed-use project at 333 Ravenswood Avenue (Assessor’s Parcel numbers 062-390-660, 062-390-670, 062-390- 730, 062-390-760, 062-390-780), Menlo Park, hereafter referred to as the “Project”, and WHEREAS, the City has determined that under the California Environmental Quality Act and its applicable guidelines the Project requires the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report, hereinafter referred to as the “EIR”; and
WHEREAS, FIRST PARTY is licensed to perform said services and desires to and does hereby undertake to perform said services.

NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL COVENANTS, PROMISES AND CONDITIONS of each of the parties hereto, it is hereby agreed as follows:

1. SCOPE OF WORK
In consideration of the payment by CITY to FIRST PARTY, as hereinafter provided, FIRST PARTY agrees to perform all the services as set forth in Exhibit "A," Scope of Services.

2. SCHEDULE FOR WORK
FIRST PARTY's proposed schedule for the various services required pursuant to this agreement will be as set forth in Exhibit "A," Scope of Services. CITY will be kept informed as to the progress of work by written reports, to be submitted monthly or as otherwise required in Exhibit "A.” Neither party shall hold the other responsible for damages or delay in performance caused by acts of God, strikes, lockouts, accidents or other events beyond the control of the other, or the other's employees and agents.

FIRST PARTY shall commence work immediately upon receipt of a "Notice to Proceed" from CITY.

The "Notice to Proceed" date shall be considered the "effective date" of the agreement, as used herein, except as otherwise specifically defined. FIRST PARTY shall complete all the work and deliver to CITY all project related files, records, and materials within one month after completion of all of FIRST PARTY's activities required under this agreement.

Page G-8.6 ATTACHMENT A
2 CC Rev 20210301

3. PROSECUTION OF WORK
FIRST PARTY will employ a sufficient staff to prosecute the work diligently and continuously and will complete the work in accordance with the schedule of work approved by the CITY. (See Exhibit "A," Scope of Services).

4. COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT
A. CITY shall pay FIRST PARTY an all-inclusive fee that shall not exceed $688,817 as described in Exhibit "A," Scope of Services. All payments shall be inclusive of all indirect and direct charges to the Project incurred by FIRST PARTY. The CITY reserves the right to withhold payment if the City determines that the quantity or quality of the work performed is unacceptable.

B. FIRST PARTY's fee for the services as set forth herein shall be considered as full compensation for all indirect and direct personnel, materials, supplies and equipment, and services incurred by FIRST PARTY and used in carrying out or completing the work.

C. Payments shall be monthly for the invoice amount or such other amount as approved by CITY. As each payment is due, the FIRST PARTY shall submit a statement describing the services performed to CITY.

This statement shall include, at a minimum, the project title, agreement number, the title(s) of personnel performing work, hours spent, payment rate, and a listing of all reimbursable costs. CITY shall have the discretion to approve the invoice and the work completed statement. Payment shall be for the invoice amount or such other amount as approved by CITY.

D. Payments are due upon receipt of written invoices. CITY shall have the right to receive, upon request, documentation substantiating charges billed to CITY. CITY shall have the right to perform an audit of the FIRST PARTY's relevant records pertaining to the charges.

5. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
A. FIRST PARTY, with regard to the work performed by it under this agreement shall not discriminate on the grounds of race, religion, color, national origin, sex, handicap, marital status or age in the retention of sub-consultants, including procurement of materials and leases of equipment.

B. FIRST PARTY shall take affirmative action to insure that employees and applicants for employment are treated without regard to their race, color, religion, sex, national origin, marital status or handicap.

Such action shall include, but not be limited to the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer; recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation and selection for training including apprenticeship.

C. FIRST PARTY shall post in prominent places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices setting forth the provisions of this non-discrimination clause.

D. FIRST PARTY shall state that all qualified applications will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, marital status or handicap.

E. FIRST PARTY shall comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and shall provide such reports as may be required to carry out the intent of this section.

F. FIRST PARTY shall incorporate the foregoing requirements of this section in FIRST PARTY’s agreement with all sub-consultants.

Page G-8.7
3 CC Rev 20210301

6. ASSIGNMENT OF AGREEMENT AND TRANSFER OF INTEREST
A. FIRST PARTY shall not assign this agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by assignment or novation), without prior written consent of the CITY thereto, provided, however, that claims for money due or to become due to the FIRST PARTY from the CITY under this agreement may be assigned to a bank, trust company, or other financial institution without such approval. Notice of an intended assignment or transfer shall be furnished promptly to the CITY.

B. In the event there is a change of more than 30 percent of the stock ownership or ownership in FIRST PARTY from the date of this agreement is executed, then CITY shall be notified before the date of said change of stock ownership or interest and CITY shall have the right, in event of such change in stock ownership or interest, to terminate this agreement upon notice to FIRST PARTY. In the event CITY is not notified of any such change in stock ownership or interest, then upon knowledge of same, it shall be deemed that CITY has terminated this agreement.

7. INDEPENDENT WORK CONTROL
It is expressly agreed that in the performance of the service necessary for compliance with this agreement, FIRST PARTY shall be and is an independent contractor and is not an agent or employee of CITY. FIRST PARTY has and shall retain the right to exercise full control and supervision of the services and full control over the employment, direction, compensation and discharge of all persons assisting FIRST PARTY in the performance of FIRST PARTY's services hereunder. FIRST PARTY shall be solely responsible for its own acts and those of its subordinates and employees.

8. CONSULTANT QUALIFICATIONS
It is expressly understood that FIRST PARTY is licensed and skilled in the professional calling necessary to perform the work agreed to be done by it under this agreement and CITY relies upon the skill of FIRST PARTY to do and perform said work in a skillful manner usual to the profession. The acceptance of FIRST PARTY's work by CITY does not operate as a release of FIRST PARTY from said understanding.

9. NOTICES
All notices hereby required under this agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid or by overnight courier service. Notices required to be given to CITY shall be addressed as follows:

Deanna Chow
Community Development
City of Menlo Park
701 Laurel St.

Menlo Park, CA 94025
650-330-6733
[email protected]
Notices required to be given to FIRST PARTY shall be addressed as follows:

Heidi Mekkelson, Principal
ICF Jones & Stokes, Inc.
201 Mission Street, Suite 1500
San Francisco, CA 94105
[email protected]
Provided that any party may change such address by notice, in writing, to the other party and thereafter notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address.

Page G-8.8
4 CC Rev 20210301

10. HOLD HARMLESS
The FIRST PARTY shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the CITY, its subsidiary agencies, their officers, agents, employees and servants from all claims, suits or actions that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the FIRST PARTY brought for, or on account of, injuries to or death of any person or damage to property resulting from the performance of any work required by this agreement by FIRST PARTY, its officers, agents, employees and servants.

Nothing herein shall be construed to require the FIRST PARTY to defend, indemnify or hold harmless the CITY, its subsidiary agencies, their officers, agents, employees and servants against any responsibility to liability in contravention of Section 2782.8 of the California Civil Code.

11. INSURANCE
A. FIRST PARTY shall not commence work under this agreement until all insurance required under this Section has been obtained and such insurance has been approved by the City, with certificates of insurance evidencing the required coverage.

B. There shall be a contractual liability endorsement extending the FIRST PARTY's coverage to include the contractual liability assumed by the FIRST PARTY pursuant to this agreement. These certificates shall specify or be endorsed to provide that thirty (30) days' notice must be given, in writing, to the CITY, at the address shown in Section 9, of any pending cancellation of the policy. FIRST PARTY shall notify CITY of any pending change to the policy. All certificates shall be filed with the City.

1. Workers' compensation and employer's liability insurance:

The FIRST PARTY shall have in effect during the entire life of this agreement workers' compensation and Employer's Liability Insurance providing full statutory coverage. In signing this agreement, the FIRST PARTY makes the following certification, required by Section 18161 of the California Labor Code: "I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of the Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this agreement" (not required if the FIRST PARTY is a Sole Proprietor).

2. Liability insurance:

The FIRST PARTY shall take out and maintain during the life of this agreement such Bodily Injury Liability and Property Damage Liability Insurance (Commercial General Liability Insurance) on an occurrence basis as shall protect it while performing work covered by this agreement from any and all claims for damages for bodily injury, including accidental death, as well as claims for property damage which may arise from the FIRST PARTY's operations under this agreement, whether such operations be by FIRST PARTY or by any sub-consultant or by anyone directly or indirectly employed by either of them. The amounts of such insurance shall be not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence and one million dollars ($1,000,000) in aggregate, or one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit bodily injury and property damage for each occurrence. FIRST PARTY shall provide the CITY with acceptable evidence of coverage, including a copy of all declarations of coverage exclusions. FIRST PARTY shall maintain Automobile Liability Insurance pursuant to this agreement in an amount of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) for each accident combined single limit or not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) for any one (1) person, and one million dollars ($1,000,000) for any one (1) accident, and Three Hundred Thousand Dollars, ($300,000) property damage.

3. Professional liability insurance:

FIRST PARTY shall maintain a policy of professional liability insurance, protecting it against claims arising out of the negligent acts, errors, or omissions of FIRST PARTY pursuant to this agreement, in the amount of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per claim and in the aggregate. Said professional liability insurance is to be kept in force for not less than one (1) year after completion of services described herein.

C. CITY and its subsidiary agencies, and their officers, agents, employees and servants shall be named as additional insured on any such policies of Commercial General Liability and Automobile Liability Page G-8.9
5 CC Rev 20210301
Insurance, (but not for the Professional Liability and workers' compensation), which shall also contain a provision that the insurance afforded thereby to the CITY, its subsidiary agencies, and their officers, agents, employees, and servants shall be primary insurance to the full limits of liability of the policy, and that if the CITY, its subsidiary agencies and their officers and employees have other insurance against a loss covered by a policy, such other insurance shall be excess insurance only.

D. In the event of the breach of any provision of this Section, or in the event any notice is received which indicates any required insurance coverage will be diminished or canceled, CITY, at its option, may, notwithstanding any other provision of this agreement to the contrary, immediately declare a material breach of this agreement and suspend all further work pursuant to this agreement.

E. Before the execution of this agreement, any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by CITY.

12. PAYMENT OF PERMITS/LICENSES
Contractor shall obtain any license, permit, or approval if necessary from any agency whatsoever for the work/services to be performed, at his/her own expense, before commencement of said work/services or forfeit any right to compensation under this agreement.

13. RESPONSIBILITY AND LIABILITY FOR SUB-CONSULTANTS AND/OR SUBCONTRACTORS Approval of or by CITY shall not constitute nor be deemed a release of responsibility and liability of FIRST PARTY or its sub-consultants and/or subcontractors for the accuracy and competency of the designs, working drawings, specifications or other documents and work, nor shall its approval be deemed to be an assumption of such responsibility by CITY for any defect in the designs, working drawings, specifications or other documents prepared by FIRST PARTY or its sub-consultants and/or subcontractors.

14. OWNERSHIP OF WORK PRODUCT
Work products of FIRST PARTY for this project, which are delivered under this agreement or which are developed, produced and paid for under this agreement, shall become the property of CITY. The reuse of FIRST PARTY’s work products by City for purposes other than intended by this agreement shall be at no risk to FIRST PARTY.

15. REPRESENTATION OF WORK
Any and all representations of FIRST PARTY, in connection with the work performed or the information supplied, shall not apply to any other project or site, except the project described in Exhibit "A" or as otherwise specified in Exhibit "A."

16. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT
A. CITY may give thirty (30) days written notice to FIRST PARTY, terminating this agreement in whole or in part at any time, either for CITY's convenience or because of the failure of FIRST PARTY to fulfill its contractual obligations or because of FIRST PARTY's change of its assigned personnel on the project without prior CITY approval. Upon receipt of such notice, FIRST PARTY shall:

1. Immediately discontinue all services affected (unless the notice directs otherwise); and

2. Deliver to the CITY all data, drawings, specifications, reports, estimates, summaries, and such other information and materials as may have been accumulated or produced by FIRST PARTY in performing work under this agreement, whether completed or in process.

B. If termination is for the convenience of CITY, an equitable adjustment in the contract price shall be made, but no amount shall be allowed for anticipated profit on unperformed services.

Page G-8.10
6 CC Rev 20210301
C. If the termination is due to the failure of FIRST PARTY to fulfill its agreement, CITY may take over the work and prosecute the same to completion by agreement or otherwise. In such case, FIRST PARTY shall be liable to CITY for any reasonable additional cost occasioned to the CITY thereby.

D. If, after notice of termination for failure to fulfill agreement obligations, it is determined that FIRST PARTY had not so failed, the termination shall be deemed to have been effected for the convenience of the CITY. In such event, adjustment in the contract price shall be made as provided in Paragraph B of this Section.

E. The rights and remedies of the CITY provided in this Section are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this agreement.

F. Subject to the foregoing provisions, the CITY shall pay FIRST PARTY for services performed and expenses incurred through the termination date.

17. INSPECTION OF WORK
It is FIRST PARTY's obligation to make the work product available for CITY's inspections and periodic reviews upon request by CITY.

18. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS
It shall be the responsibility of FIRST PARTY to comply with all State and Federal Laws applicable to the work and services provided pursuant to this agreement, including but not limited to compliance with prevailing wage laws, if applicable.

19. BREACH OF AGREEMENT
A. This agreement is governed by applicable federal and state statutes and regulations. Any material deviation by FIRST PARTY for any reason from the requirements thereof, or from any other provision of this agreement, shall constitute a breach of this agreement and may be cause for termination at the election of the CITY.

B. The CITY reserves the right to waive any and all breaches of this agreement, and any such waiver shall not be deemed a waiver of any previous or subsequent breaches. In the event the CITY chooses to waive a particular breach of this agreement, it may condition same on payment by FIRST PARTY of actual damages occasioned by such breach of agreement.

20. SEVERABILITY
The provisions of this agreement are severable. If any portion of this agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the agreement shall remain in full force and effect unless amended or modified by the mutual consent of the parties.

21. CAPTIONS
The captions of this agreement are for convenience and reference only and shall not define, explain, modify, limit, exemplify, or aid in the interpretation, construction, or meaning of any provisions of this agreement.

22. LITIGATION OR ARBITRATION
In the event that suit or arbitration is brought to enforce the terms of this agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to litigation costs and reasonable attorneys' fees. The Dispute Resolution provisions are set forth on Exhibit "B," ‘Dispute Resolution’ attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein.

Page G-8.11
7 CC Rev 20210301

23. RETENTION OF RECORDS
Contractor shall maintain all required records for three years after the City makes final payment and all other pending matters are closed, and shall be subject to the examination and /or audit of the City, a federal agency, and the state of California.

24. TERM OF AGREEMENT
This agreement shall remain in effect for the period of September 21, 2022 through June 30, 2024 unless extended, amended, or terminated in writing by CITY.

25. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This document constitutes the sole agreement of the parties hereto relating to said project and states the rights, duties, and obligations of each party as of the document's date. Any prior agreement, promises, negotiations, or representations between parties not expressly stated in this document are not binding.

All modifications, amendments, or waivers of the terms of this agreement must be in writing and signed by the appropriate representatives of the parties to this agreement.

26. STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTEREST
Consultants, as defined by Section 18701 of the Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission, Title 2, Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations, are required to file a Statement of Economic Interests with 30 days of approval of a contract services agreement with the City of its subdivisions, on an annual basis thereafter during the term of the contract, and within 30 days of completion of the contract.

Based upon review of the Consultant’s Scope of Work and determination by the City Manager, it is determined that Consultant IS NOT required to file a Statement of Economic Interest. A statement of Economic Interest shall be filed with the City Clerk’s office no later than 30 days after the execution of the agreement.

SIGNATURE PAGE TO FOLLOW
Page G-8.12
8 CC Rev 20210301
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement on the day and year first above written.

FOR FIRST PARTY:

Signature Date
Printed name Title
Tax ID#
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Nira F. Doherty, City Attorney Date
FOR CITY OF MENLO PARK:

Justin I.C. Murphy, City Manager Date
ATTEST:

Judi A. Herren, City Clerk Date
Page G-8.13
9 CC Rev 20210301
EXHIBIT “A” – SCOPE OF SERVICES
A1.SCOPE OF WORK
FIRST PARTY agrees to provide consultant services for CITY’s Community Development Department. In the event of any discrepancy between any of the terms of the FIRST PARTY’s proposal and those of this agreement, the version most favorable to the CITY shall prevail. FIRST PARTY shall provide the following services:

Provide general consultant services for projects as determined by the CITY. The detailed scope of work for each task the CITY assigns the consultant shall be referred to as Exhibit A -1, which will become part of this agreement. A notice to proceed will be issued separately for each separate scope of work agreed to between the CITY and FIRST PARTY.

FIRST PARTY agrees to perform these services as directed by the CITY in accordance with the standards of its profession and CITY’s satisfaction.

A2.COMPENSATION
CITY hereby agrees to pay FIRST PARTY at the rates to be negotiated between FIRST PARTY and CITY as detailed in Exhibit A-1. The actual charges shall be based upon (a) FIRST PARTY’s standard hourly rate for various classifications of personnel; (b) all fees, salaries and expenses to be paid to engineers, consultants, independent contractors, or agents employed by FIRST PARTY; and shall (c) include reimbursement for mileage, courier and plan reproduction. The total fee for each separate Scope of Work agreed to between the CITY and FIRST PARTY shall not exceed the amount shown in Exhibit A-1.

FIRST PARTY shall be paid within thirty (30) days after approval of billing for work completed and approved by the CITY. Invoices shall be submitted containing all information contained in Section A5 below. In no event shall FIRST PARTY be entitled to compensation for extra work unless an approved change order, or other written authorization describing the extra work and payment terms, has been executed by CITY before the commencement of the work.

A3.SCHEDULE OF WORK
FIRST PARTY’S proposed schedule for the various services required will be set forth in Exhibit A-1.

A4.CHANGES IN WORK -- EXTRA WORK
In addition to services described in Section A1, the parties may from time to time agree in writing that FIRST PARTY, for additional compensation, shall perform additional services including but not limited to:
• Change in the services because of changes in scope of the work. • Additional tasks not specified herein as required by the CITY.

The CITY and FIRST PARTY shall agree in writing to any changes in compensation and/or changes in FIRST PARTY’s services before the commencement of any work. If FIRST PARTY deems work he/she has been directed to perform is beyond the scope of this agreement and constitutes extra work, FIRST PARTY shall immediately inform the CITY in writing of the fact. The CITY shall make a determination as to whether such work is in fact beyond the scope of this agreement and constitutes extra work. In the event that the CITY determines that such work does constitute extra work, it shall provide compensation to the FIRST PARTY in accordance with an agreed cost that is fair and equitable. This cost will be mutually agreed upon by the CITY and FIRST PARTY. A supplemental agreement providing for such compensation for extra work shall be negotiated between the CITY and the FIRST PARTY. Such supplemental agreement shall be executed by the FIRST PARTY and may be approved by the City Manager upon recommendation of the Assistant Community Development Director.

Page G-8.14
10 CC Rev 20210301
A5.BILLINGS
FIRST PARTY’s bills shall include the following information: A brief description of services performed, project title and the agreement number; the date the services were performed; the number of hours spent and by whom; the current contract amount; the current invoice amount; Except as specifically authorized by CITY, FIRST PARTY shall not bill CITY for duplicate services performed by more than one person. In no event shall FIRST PARTY submit any billing for an amount in excess of the maximum amount of compensation provided in Section A2.

The expenses of any office, including furniture and equipment rental, supplies, salaries of employees, telephone calls, postage, advertising, and all other expenses incurred by FIRST PARTY in the performances of this agreement shall be incurred at the FIRST PARTY’s discretion. Such expenses shall be FIRST PARTY’s sole financial responsibility.

Page G-8.15
11 CC Rev 20210301
EXHIBIT “B” - DISPUTE RESOLUTION
B1.0 All claims, disputes and other matters in question between the FIRST PARTY and CITY arising out of, or relating to, the contract documents or the breach thereof, shall be resolved as follows:

B2.0 Mediation
B2.1 The parties shall attempt in good faith first to mediate such dispute and use their best efforts to reach agreement on the matters in dispute. After a written demand for non-binding mediation, which shall specify in detail the facts of the dispute, and within ten (10) days from the date of delivery of the demand, the matter shall be submitted to a mutually agreeable mediator. The Mediator shall hear the matter and provide an informal opinion and advice, none of which shall be binding upon the parties, but is expected by the parties to help resolve the dispute. Said informal opinion and advice shall be submitted to the parties within twenty (20) days following written demand for mediation. The Mediator’s fee shall be shared equally by the parties. If the dispute has not been resolved, the matter shall be submitted to arbitration in accordance with Paragraph B3.1.

B3.0 Arbitration
B3.1 Any dispute between the parties that is to be resolved by arbitration as provided in Paragraph B2.1 shall be settled and decided by arbitration conducted by the American Arbitration Association in accordance with the Construction Industry Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association, as then in effect, except as provided below. Any such arbitration shall be held before three arbitrators who shall be selected by mutual agreement of the parties; if agreement is not reached on the selection of the arbitrators within fifteen (15) days, then such arbitrator(s) shall be appointed by the presiding Judge of the court of jurisdiction of the agreement.

B3.2 The provisions of the Construction Industry Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association shall apply and govern such arbitration, subject, however to the following:

B3.3 Any demand for arbitration shall be writing and must be made within a reasonable time after the claim, dispute or other matter in question as arisen. In no event shall the demand for arbitration be made after the date that institution of legal or equitable proceedings based on such claim, dispute or other matter would be barred by the applicable statute of limitations.

B3.4 The arbitrator or arbitrators appointed must be former or retired judges, or attorneys at law with last ten (10) years’ experience in construction litigation.

B3.5 All proceedings involving the parties shall be reported by a certified shorthand court reporter, and written transcripts of the proceedings shall be prepared and made available to the parties.

B3.6 The arbitrator or arbitrators must be made within and provide to the parties factual findings and the reasons on which the decisions of the arbitrator or arbitrators is based.

B3.7 Final decision by the arbitrator or arbitrators must be made within ninety (90) days from the date of the arbitration proceedings are initiated.

B3.8 The prevailing party shall be awarded reasonable attorneys’ fees, expert and non-expert witness costs and expenses, and other costs and expenses incurred in connection with the arbitration, unless the arbitrator or arbitrators for good cause determine otherwise.

B3.9 Costs and fees of the arbitrator or arbitrators shall be borne by the non-prevailing party, unless the arbitrator or arbitrators for good cause determine otherwise.

B3.10 The award or decision of the arbitrator or arbitrators, which may include equitable relief, shall be final, and judgment may be entered on it in accordance with applicable law in any court having jurisdiction over the matter.

Page G-8.16
Parkline Project
Response to RFP
Environmental Impact Report Preparation and
Environmental Consultant Services
Submitted to:

City of Menlo Park
701 Laurel Street
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Submitted by:

ICF Jones & Stokes, Inc.
201 Mission Street, Suite 1500
San Francisco, CA 94105
Corinna D. Sandmeier
Acting Principal Planner
[email protected]
Heidi Mekkelson
Principal
415.677.7116
[email protected]
July 29, 2022
(Rev. September 13, 2022)
This proposal contains ICF’s confidential information and shall not be disclosed to any third party or used for any purpose other than to evaluate this proposal.

ATTACHMENT B Page G-8.17
City of Menlo Park
Parkline Project
Response to RFP
Environmental Impact Report Preparation and
Environmental Consultant Services
Submitted by:

ICF Jones & Stokes, Inc.
201 Mission Street, Suite 1500
San Francisco, CA 94105
Heidi Mekkelson
Principal
415.677.7116
[email protected]
Submitted to:

City of Menlo Park
701 Laurel Street
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Corinna D. Sandmeier Acting
Principal Planner
[email protected]
July 29, 2022
(Rev. September 13, 2022)
This proposal contains ICF’s confidential information and shall not be disclosed to any third party or used for any purpose other than to evaluate this proposal. Copyright © 2022 ICF Resources, LLC. All rights reserved.

Page G-8.18
201 Mission Street, Suite 1500, San Francisco, CA 94105 icf.com Corinna D. Sandmeier, Acting Principal Planner
City of Menlo Park
701 Laurel Street
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Subject: RESPONSE to RFP ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PREPARATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT SERVICES – PARKLINE PROJECT
Dear Ms. Sandmeier:

ICF Jones & Stokes, Inc. (“ICF”), is pleased to present this scope and budget regarding preparation of an environmental impact report (EIR) for the Parkline Project (hereafter referred to as the Project).

ICF has formed a team of expert managers, proficient technical personnel, and long-term partner subconsultants to support the City of Menlo Park (City) in successfully completing environmental review of the proposed mixed-use development on the SRI International site. The Project site is at the center of the Menlo Park community, surrounded by Menlo Park’s civic hub to the north, MenloAtherton High School to the south, and residential neighborhoods on all sides. It is also within walking distance of regional public transportation and downtown Menlo Park. ICF recognizes the importance of this location as well as the importance of the Project overall.

ICF has a history of delivering large, complex, place-making projects throughout the Bay Area and beyond. We will work with Project stakeholders, including City planners, the development team (indirectly through the City), City Commissioners/City Council, and the public, to ensure that the EIR not only presents a technically accurate, complete, and legally defensible analysis of the environmental effects of the Project but also an analysis that is expressly responsive to City and community concerns and constraints. To accomplish this, we offer a team of highly skilled environmental professionals who will produce comprehensive California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documentation, allowing the Project to be developed as expeditiously as possible. Our considerable experience in Menlo Park—including lead environmental consultant on the previously proposed SRI International project in 2013–2015—will enable our staff to respond quickly and efficiently to your needs.

This submittal includes our overall approach and scope of work as well as our relevant experience and proposed staffing. Our proposed Project management staff consists of a team that is familiar with the intricacies of development in Menlo Park and backed by ICF’s depth and breadth of technical expertise across the subject areas to be addressed under CEQA. Our team also includes two subconsultants—Hexagon and Keyser Marston Associates—that will contribute their expertise to transportation and housing needs consulting services, respectively. Our team members have worked together extensively on prominent CEQA projects throughout the Bay Area, including, most recently, the Willow Village Master Plan Project. We know how to deliver environmental documents and manage environmental processes for innovative and complex projects.

Our team is excited about the opportunity to provide CEQA services for this important project. We are eager to discuss our approach with you and hope you will decide that our team is qualified to meet your needs. If selected as the successful bidder, ICF looks forward to negotiating mutually acceptable contract terms and conditions. Please feel free to contact Heidi Mekkelson at 415.677.7116 or [email protected] should you have any questions.

Sincerely,
Hawani Tessema
Senior Manager, Contracts
Page G-8.19
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. i Table of Contents
Firm and Project Team Qualifications .......................................................................................................... 1 Scope of Work ............................................................................................................................................10 Schedule.....................................................................................................................................................28 Cost Estimate .............................................................................................................................................28 Relevant Project Experience and References............................................................................................30 Other Relevant Information and Disclosures..............................................................................................34 Appendices
Appendix A Resumes
Appendix B Keyser Marston Associates – Housing Needs Assessment Scope Appendix C Hexagon – Transportation Scope
Appendix D West Yost – Optional Water Supply Assessment Scope Appendix E Proposed Schedule
Appendix F Cost Estimate
Page G-8.20
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 1 Firm and Project Team Qualifications
ICF Jones & Stokes, Inc. (an ICF company, hereafter referred to as ICF), a global consulting and technology services provider focused on making big things possible for our clients, is the bidding entity for this proposal and a subsidiary of parent company ICF International, Inc. (NASDAQ:ICFI).

ICF is a recognized leader in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliance, having prepared thousands of environmental impact studies and related documents since 1970. ICF is proposing a team of dedicated professionals who are familiar with Menlo Park, who are knowledgeable about local issues, and who have the capacity to provide timely and exceptional environmental services for the Parkline Project (Project). In addition, we are deliberately putting forth a similar team that has ushered several recent City of Menlo Park (City) development projects through the CEQA clearance process, including subconsultants Hexagon (transportation) and Keyser Marston Associates (KMA) (housing needs assessment [HNA]). Each proposed specialist on the team has a key area of expertise to contribute and will work closely with other specialists on all aspects of the Project to keep the process cohesive.

ICF
Since 1969, ICF has been serving government at all levels as well as major corporations and multilateral institutions on infrastructure improvement projects, restoration and planning projects, and compliance with mandated government programs. More than 8,000 employees (inclusive of corporate affiliates) in 70 offices serve these clients worldwide. More information is available at www.icf.com.

ICF provides consulting and implementation services to
address today’s most complex management, technology,
and policy challenges. Our work is focused primarily in four key markets: environment and infrastructure, energy and climate change, health and social programs, and
homeland security. The firm provides end-to-end solutions to support clients through the entire program life cycle, from analysis and design through implementation and evaluation. The ICF team brings the following resources to deliver the full scope of services that may be required to meet the City’s needs on the Project:
§ A professional staff with full-time and on-call environmental analysts, hazardous materials experts, land use and natural resource planners, wildlife and fisheries biologists, plant and wetland biologists, arborists, watershed planners, restoration and mitigation experts, hydrology and water quality specialists, noise and vibration specialists, environmental permitting and conservation planning experts, archaeologists, and architectural historians. § A wide network of environmental regulatory expertise. ICF is a recognized leader in CEQA compliance. ICF professionals have authored guidelines and taught University of California Extension courses on complying with environmental law and regulations. Many of our specialists are also authors who have collaborated on definitive CEQA publications that have become industry standards for assisting planning professionals with compliance documentation. Our own environmental regulatory staff includes former agency regulators.

We stay up to date on the latest policy developments at the federal, state, and local levels.

ICF has direct and ongoing experience throughout the
Bay Area. With more than 250 technical staff members in Northern California, ICF is one of the largest CEQA
consulting firms in the region. Our deep bench ensures
our ability to meet client needs quickly and effectively. ICF has staff members operating out of multiple offices on the West Coast, and we have the capacity to provide the City ICF Profile Snapshot
Founded in: 1969
ICF Employees: 8,000+
Northern California Office Locations:

San Francisco and Sacramento
Office Where Work Will Be Managed
ICF’s San Francisco Office
201 Mission Street, Suite 1500
San Francisco, CA 94105
Page G-8.21
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 2 with timely and high-quality services. Our staff is experienced in balancing an existing backlog of projects and has the capacity to initiate new projects weekly. If selected, although we are able to draw expertise from all West Coast offices, we will service the Project primarily from our San Francisco office.

Subconsultants
Included on the CEQA team with ICF are Hexagon for the transportation analysis and KMA for the HNA.

Hexagon
Hexagon has a long history of working on projects within Menlo Park as well as the entire Bay Area.

ICF and Hexagon have collaborated extensively and will work together to provide a transportation study that will satisfy the requirements of the City, CEQA, and the City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG) Congestion Management Program (CMP). Hexagon has prepared transportation studies and CEQA-specific traffic analyses throughout the Bay Area. These include analyses of vehicle miles traveled (VMT), operational peak-hour traffic, freeway segments and ramps, queuing, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, transit facilities, and site access and circulation.

Hexagon also provides thorough peer reviews of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plans for its clients. Hexagon has provided services for projects in Menlo Park that included the 1350 Adams Court Project, 3723 Haven Avenue Hotel, Menlo Park Housing Element Update, Willow Village Master Plan, and the Menlo Park Citywide Model.

Keyser Marston Associates
KMA is included on the ICF team to provide an HNA. KMA is exceptionally well qualified and able to prepare the HNA for the Project because of its broad expertise from conducting housing impact studies and project-specific housing needs analyses. Throughout the Bay Area, KMA has prepared HNAs that have analyzed a project’s net impact on housing supply and need, the geographic distribution of housing needs by jurisdiction, and a project’s potential influence on the regional housing market. KMA has prepared HNAs in Menlo Park that have encompassed a wide range of projects, including mixed-use, residential, and office development projects (e.g., Menlo Gateway, Facebook Campus, Facebook Campus Expansion Project, Menlo Flats, Menlo Portal, Menlo Uptown, 1350 Adams Court, Commonwealth Building 3, 111 Independence Drive, Willow Village Master Plan).

Project Team Approach and Qualifications
ICF is aware of the importance of the Parkline Project in the context of the region’s need to provide high-density, mixed-use projects near transit. Understanding that the expediency of the environmental clearance process is essential to moving a project forward, we have developed an approach that allows us to ensure the production of high-quality and legally sound products in a timely fashion. Our success with meeting aggressive schedules while adeptly handling complex environmental issues on similar projects in Menlo Park, including the Willow Village Master Plan Project, is a testament to our ability to usher the Project efficiently through the CEQA process. Aside from our commitment to a careful and efficient execution of the detailed scope of work (SOW), we bring the key characteristics described below to support implementation of this prominent project.

Seasoned Team with Relevant Experience, Commitment, and Availability The ICF team’s expertise from working on environmental impact reports (EIRs) on the San Francisco Peninsula as well as in the Silicon Valley/South Bay, including our recent experience in Menlo Park, means we understand the planning context of the area, including constituents in a variety of jurisdictions, environmentally challenging topics, and interrelationships among cities in the area. In addition to this wide-ranging knowledge, we have built productive and respectful relationships with Menlo Park staff members. We strive to perform to the satisfaction of the City. Our goal is to devote the same level of commitment and dedication to the Parkline Project that we devoted to our past successful CEQA compliance efforts in Menlo Park.

Page G-8.22
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 3 Our team has been assembled with regard to our previous work in the city. Heidi Mekkelson, our project director, and Kirsten Chapman, our senior advisor, will contribute valuable local knowledge and strategic thinking to move the Project through the CEQA process. Jessica Viramontes, our project manager, and Devan Atteberry, our deputy project manager, also have extensive experience from successfully coordinating and writing complex CEQA compliance documents for projects in Menlo Park and throughout the Bay Area. Heidi, Kirsten, Jessica, and Devan are known to the City for their excellence in environmental compliance work, the lead agency process experience, and management, all of which are necessary attributes for successfully achieving CEQA clearance for high-profile priority development projects. This management team has also worked directly with Hexagon and KMA for years and assembled quality documents. Our diverse team, including the talented and experienced technical specialists included in the organization chart below, are available and excited to get to work on the Project.

As previously mentioned, ICF has almost a decade of experience working from on CEQA documents in Menlo Park. Although ICF is currently working on EIRs in Menlo Park, many of these projects are nearing completion, freeing up team members who are familiar with the city to work on new projects.

In addition to our ongoing projects in Menlo Park, as well as several completed projects, ICF previously worked on the SRI International Campus Modernization Project EIR from 2013 to 2015.

This project, which was on the site of the current Parkline Project, planned to modernize the SRI campus without increasing gross floor area. Specifically, it intended to retain five buildings, with approximately 62,000 square feet; demolish approximately 1.21 million square feet of building space; and construct 13 new buildings within the same area, resulting in no net increase in square footage. ICF completed several sections of the administrative draft EIR for the proposed project, but the development application was put on hold and the contract eventually expired. Several members of our proposed team for the Parkline Project visited the site in 2014 and prepared sections. They are excited about the prospect of working on a new project at the same site.

Strong Team Management
As a multidisciplinary environmental consulting firm, ICF provides a full range of in-house services related to environmental planning. Using our own staff expertise, in combination with the skills and services provided by our subconsultants, we have the capability to complete every element of our proposed SOW successfully. The key to successful teaming is a clearly defined SOW with wellestablished roles for each consultant on a project. In approaching the tasks included in our scope of services, our management team works with all team members to develop and outline their roles, thereby ensuring a quality project.

With collaboration being a vital focus of our team, ICF’s role will be to ensure that the team understands Project goals, objectives, and individual responsibilities. We will bring together all perspectives provided by the team throughout all phases of the Project and set incremental delivery schedules to meet Project milestones. As a prime consultant, ICF will be responsible for reviewing subconsultant work products (e.g., technical studies) to ensure that they meet applicable CEQA requirements, are clearly written, and provide the necessary level of technical analysis to support the CEQA document.

Proposed Project Team
ICF is proposing a team of dedicated professionals who are familiar with the City and the department’s expectations, who are knowledgeable about local issues, and who have the capacity to provide the City with timely and exceptional environmental services. The organizational chart below, the table that follows, and the resumes in Appendix A highlight the experience and qualifications of the relevant ICF team members, demonstrating their ability to meet the minimum qualifications outlined in the request for proposal (RFP). The resumes provided in Appendix A include the various team leads at ICF, Hexagon, and KMA. Resumes for additional staff members (including for the Optional Tasks) can be provided upon request.

Page G-8.23
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 4 City of Menlo Park
Land Use
Kirsten Chapman
Zachary Cornejo
Transportation
Hexagon (sub)
Air Quality / Greenhouse Gas
Laura Yoon
Jacqueline Mansoor
Darrin Trageser
Biological Resources
Lisa Webber
Energy
Devan Atteberry
Cultural (Archaeology)
Lora Holland
Jennifer Wildt
Cultural (Historic)
Jon Rusch
Nicole Felicetti
Geology and Soils
Diana Roberts
Noise
Cory Matsui
Noah Schumaker
Hydrology and Water Quality
Katrina Sukola
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Diana Roberts
Mario Barrera
Population and Housing
Kirsten Chapman
Keyser Marston Associates (sub)
Public Services/Utilities/Recreation
Devan Atteberry
Zachary Cornejo
Aesthetics
Kirsten Chapman
Document Production
John Mathias
John Conley
Heidi Mekkelson, Project Director
Jessica Viramontes, Project Manager
Devan Atteberry, Deputy Project Manager
Kirsten Chapman, Senior Advisor
Page G-8.24
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 5 Staff/
Billing Classification
*Tasks are described for
each role. Roles are shown
in the organizational chart.

Education/Registrations/
Certifications
*Highest level of education included in this
table. See resumes in Appendix A for complete
education description.

Recent Experience
Years of Relevant
Experience
Availability (%)*
PROJECT DIRECTOR and SENIOR ADVISOR Tasks: Senior oversight of team, ensuring technical adequacy, QA/QC, adherence to scope and scheduleHeidi Mekkelson, Project Director BS, Environmental Studies/Biology, University of Southern California, 2003 Willow Village Master Plan Project Environmental Impact Report—City of Menlo Park, CA City of San Bruno Environmental Impact Report for the Bayhill Specific Plan—City of San Bruno, CA Station East Residential/Mixed Use Project EIR—City of Union City, CA 18 60
Kirsten Chapman, Senior Advisor
BA, Environmental Studies/Economics, University of California, Santa Cruz, 2007 Willow Village Master Plan Project Environmental Impact Report—City of Menlo Park, CA Various office development initial studies and EIRs in the General Plan and M2 Area Zoning Update (ConnectMenlo) area—City of Menlo Park, CA SRI International Campus Modernization Project EIR—City of Menlo Park, CA 14 60
PROJECT MANAGER Tasks: Manages internal staff and subconsultants. Provides day-to-day oversight. Ensures adherence to scope, schedule, budget, and QA/QCJessica Viramontes, Senior Environmental Planner MS, Environmental Management, University of San Francisco, 2011 BS, Environmental Management and Protections, California Polytechnic University San Luis Obispo, 2006 Middle Plaza at 500 El Camino Real Infill EIR—City of Menlo Park, CA Facebook Menlo Park Campus Expansion EIR and EIR Addendum—City of Menlo Park, CA 16 75
DEPUTY PROJECT MANAGER Tasks: Manages internal team, provides support to senior management teamDevan Atteberry, Senior Environmental Planner BS, Environmental Management and Protection, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, 2018 Lot 3 North: 1350 Adams Court Project IS/MND and EIR—City of Menlo Park, Menlo Park, CA, Station East Residential/Mixed-Use Project EIR—City of Union City, Union City, CA 3 45
Page G-8.25
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 6 Staff/
Billing Classification
*Tasks are described for
each role. Roles are shown
in the organizational chart.

Education/Registrations/
Certifications
*Highest level of education included in this
table. See resumes in Appendix A for complete
education description.

Recent Experience
Years of Relevant ExperienceAvailability (%)*

SUPPORT STAFF
Diana Roberts,
Senior Consultant I
MA, Linguistics, Cornell University, 1991
BS, Applied Psychology, Georgia Institute of
Technology, 1982
1075 O’Brien Drive IS/Mitigated Negative Declaration—City of Menlo Park San Bruno Bayhill Specific Plan EIR—City of San Bruno, CA SRI International Campus Modernization Project EIR—City of Menlo Park, CA 24 40
Mario Barrera,
Senior Consultant II
BS, Engineering Technology, Environmental
Technology; California State University, Long
Beach, 2003
San Francisco Housing Element 2022 Update Environmental Impact Report— San Francisco Planning Department, San Francisco, CA
The Hub Plan 30 Van Ness Avenue Project, 98 Franklin Street Project, and Hub Housing Sustainability District EIR—County of San Francisco, CA 20 20
Zachary Cornejo,
Associate Consultant I MS, Natural Resource Stewardship, Colorado State University, 2019
San Francisco Housing Element 2022 Update Environmental Impact Report (EIR)—San Francisco Planning Department, San Francisco, CA Mission Bay School Project—San Francisco Unified School District, San Francisco, CA
4 50
Lora Holland, MA, RPA,
Senior Consultant II
MA, Anthropology, University of West
Florida, 2006
Iron Horse Trail Bollinger Canyon Overcrossing Project—City of San Ramon Public Works Department, San Ramon, CA
Alpine Road Trail Improvements Project—Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, San Mateo County, CA
19 25
Page G-8.26
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 7 Staff/
Billing Classification
*Tasks are described for
each role. Roles are shown
in the organizational chart.

Education/Registrations/
Certifications
*Highest level of education included in this
table. See resumes in Appendix A for complete
education description.

Recent Experience
Years of Relevant ExperienceAvailability (%)*
Jennifer Wildt,
Senior Consultant II
Ph.D., M.A. Archaeology, Boston University,
2015
B.A., Archaeology, University of Virginia,
2001
Commonwealth Building 3 Environmental Impact Report – City of Menlo Park, CA
San Francisco Housing Element, Archaeological Sensitivity Analysis – City of San Francisco, CA
21 20
Cory Matsui,
Senior Consultant I
BA, Atmospheric Science, University of
California Berkeley, 2009
AA, Physics, Cabrillo College, 2007
San Francisco Housing Element 2022 Update Environmental Impact Report— San Francisco Planning Department, San Francisco, CA
One Vassar Project Community Plan Exemption, San Francisco, CA 11 20
Jon Rusch,
Senior Consultant I
MA, Historic Preservation Planning, Cornell
University, 2013
BA, Geography, University of Minnesota,
2006
Willow Village Master Plan Project Environmental Impact Report—City of Menlo Park, Menlo Park, CA
San Francisco Housing Element Update Historic Context Statements and Environmental Impact Report—City and County of San Francisco Planning Department, San Francisco, CA
10 30
Nicole Felicetti,
Assistant Consultant
MS, Historic Preservation, University of
Pennsylvania, 2021
BA, Architecture, University of Kentucky,
2018
Better Market Street—City of San Francisco Department of Public Works, San Francisco, CA
Bay Area Regional Transit Systemwide Evaluation—San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), San Francisco, CA
3 30
Noah Schumaker,
Associate Consultant I
MS, Mechanical Engineering, Michigan
Technological University, 2021
Willow Village Master Plan Project Environmental Impact Report—City of Menlo Park, Menlo Park, CA
San Francisco Housing Element 2022 Update Environmental Impact Report— San Francisco Planning Department, San Francisco, CA
1 40
Darrin Trageser,
Associate Consultant I
MS, Atmospheric Sciences, University of
California, Davis, 2014
Willow Village Master Plan Project Environmental Impact Report—City of Menlo Park, Menlo Park, CA
555 West Middlefield EIR—City of Mountain View, CA
7 20
Page G-8.27
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 8 Staff/
Billing Classification
*Tasks are described for
each role. Roles are shown
in the organizational chart.

Education/Registrations/
Certifications
*Highest level of education included in this
table. See resumes in Appendix A for complete
education description.

Recent Experience
Years of Relevant ExperienceAvailability (%)*
Laura Yoon,
Technical Director
MS, Environmental Management, University
of San Francisco, 2013
City of San Bruno Environmental Impact Report for the Bayhill Specific Plan— City of San Bruno, CA
Belmont General Plan and Specific Plan EIR—City of Belmont, CA 12 20
Jacqueline Mansoor,
Associate Consultant I
MCRP, City and Regional Planning,
California Polytechnic University San Luis
Obispo, 2018
1125 O’Brien Drive EIR—City of Menlo Park, CA
1075 O’Brien Drive EIR—City of Menlo Park, CA
5 40
Lisa Webber,
Technical Director
MS, Botany, University of Massachusetts,
Amherst, 1987
BA, Biology, University of California, Santa
Cruz, 1980
San Francisco Housing Element 2022 Update EIR—San Francisco Planning Department, San Francisco, CA
San Rafael Transit Center Replacement Project—Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District, San Rafael, CA
32 20
Katrina Sukola,
Senior Consultant I
MS Chemistry, University of Manitoba,
2003
BS Environmental Chemistry, University
of Waterloo, 2001
Willow Village Master Plan Project Environmental Impact Report—City of Menlo Park, CA
City of San Bruno Environmental Impact Report for the Bayhill Specific Plan— City of San Bruno, CA
18 20
* The availability column represents a staff member’s average availability for a project, given adequate notice. The percentage is subject to change, depending on other project commitments, but represents our best estimate for any given project.

Page G-8.28
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 9 Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity at ICF
ICF was founded more than 50 years ago by former Tuskegee Airman C.D. Lester. We were then called the Inner City Fund, with a mission to finance minority-owned businesses in Washington, DC.

Since then, ICF has evolved to grow our consulting business, partnering with clients on complex energy, environment, health, and socioeconomic development issues. Our purpose as a company is to build a more prosperous and resilient world for all, including for each of our employees. Currently, ICF is a global company with offices in more than 60 countries. As a reflection of its commitment to diversity and inclusion, 53 percent of its leaders across the company are female and 39 percent of its executives are women or minorities. ICF constantly seeks inclusive opportunities to collaborate with experts, suppliers, contractors, and technology partners with diverse perspectives who are just as driven as we are to make a difference.

ICF’s company values are driven equally by company leaders and by local teams of colleagues, who are committed to using our professional positions to ensure our respective fields have intentional, positive impacts on our communities. In 2020, ICF prioritized making diversity, equity, and inclusion foundational company values. The company began to match employees’ personal donations at 100 percent to organizations supporting racial and social injustices, with no limits. ICF engaged in company-wide town halls, listening tours, and employee surveys. Informed by employee feedback, ICF developed a clear diversity and inclusion roadmap that we are committed to continually measuring and monitoring.

Key initiatives that grew from these efforts included the hiring of our vice president of diversity and inclusion, who leads companywide efforts to advance equity, starting with recruiting and hiring but extending to the current staff through required diversity and inclusion training (e.g., increasing awareness of microaggressions and unconscious bias) and employee community networks. These voluntary, employee-led networks are centered around Asian, Black, First Nations/Indigenous Peoples, Diverse Abilities, Hispanic/Latinx, LGBTQIA+, and Women’s community issues; they reflect ICF’s mission and values by supporting a diverse, inclusive workplace through mentoring, professional development, and community outreach opportunities for all employees. ICF also implemented a corporate training course to promote an inclusive workplace and supported that training with a peer-to-peer Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) Champion program. The D&I Champions participate in peer coaching and team meetings, bringing course content to life in ongoing discussions to further explore our inclusive culture framework: objectivity, belonging, voice, and growth.

Within the Environment and Planning Division, ICF conducts focused diversity, equity, and inclusion learning courses, group discussions, and workshops. Our cultural resources group recently conducted a focus group on “Cultural Resource Management in the Time of Black Lives Matter.” Through the use of a mural board, the group identified vision statements and action items identifying how clients and projects can benefit from a proactive, innovative, and intentional approach to bringing new voices and under-represented groups to the table during the identification of cultural resources and assessment of impacts.

We are committed to improving our hiring practices to encourage minority and under-represented groups to pursue a consulting career at ICF. We conduct focused recruiting at the University of Hawaii, where 80 percent of the student population identifies as black, indigenous, and people of color, and San José State University, an Asian American and Native American Pacific IslanderServing Institution grantee. We recently launched a guest speaker pilot program at community colleges and high schools with prominent minority populations. We regularly post jobs to LinkedIn groups targeting women, such as Women in Transportation, and distribute them through targeted professional organizations such as Latinos in Heritage Conservation.

For more information about ICF’s diversity, equity, and inclusion values and initiatives, see https://www.icf.com/company/about/diversity-inclusion.

Page G-8.29
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 10 Scope of Work
Project Understanding
The City of Menlo Park is planning redevelopment of SRI International’s approximately 64-acre research campus adjacent to the city’s downtown area. The Project site currently contains approximately 1.38 million gross square feet (gsf) of office, research-and-development (R&D), amenity, and support uses across 38 buildings; 1,500 people are employed at the site. The Project would demolish all but three buildings, as well as landscaping and surface parking, and construct a transit-oriented, mixed-use campus with a new Residential Zoning District and Commercial Zoning District. The 10-acre Residential Zoning District would be in the western portion of the Project site and include 400 rental units. The 53-acre Commercial Zoning District would include five new office/R&D buildings (totaling 1.05 million gsf), the three buildings to be retained (totaling 284,000 gsf), an approximately 44,000 gsf office amenity building, an approximately 2,000 gsf community amenity building, three above-grade parking structures that would provide approximately 2,030 parking spaces, and more than 25 acres of publicly accessible open space spread throughout the entire Project site. The Project would also include evaluation of a Project variant that would include up to 600 residential units, which would intensify the residential uses within the proposed Residential Zoning District. The proposed variant would increase residential building heights within the district and add additional residential units on a separate 1-acre portion of the Project site.

The Project site is on Ravenswood Avenue between El Camino Real and Middlefield Road, near the Menlo Park Caltrain station. The proximity to local and regional transit services would allow future employees and residents of the Project to take advantage of sustainable transportation options. The proposed onsite mix of complementary land uses would also provide opportunities to reduce VMT, traffic impacts, and the energy demand typically associated with new high-density development.

Scope of Work
Based on our review of Project materials, we believe that an EIR would be the appropriate CEQA document for the Project. This SOW assumes that an EIR will prepared for the Project in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, with certain topics, including, but not necessarily limited to, agricultural/ forestry resources, mineral resources, and wildfire, scoped out from detailed review in the EIR.

Task 1: Kick-Off Meeting/Data Collection
This task includes initiation of the CEQA process for an EIR. Initiation will include a CEQA process/kickoff meeting with the applicant and the City. ICF staff members will identify key Project issues and conduct an extensive review of relevant environmental, background, and regulatory documents as well as the Project entitlement plans. This task will also include a site reconnaissance visit, data collection, identification of data needs, preparation of a detailed data needs list, and any potential refinements to the scope and schedule. Our revised SOW will reflect these discussions as needed.

Deliverables: One draft and one final SOW, refined schedule, kick-off meeting agenda, data needs request, EIR outline, and summary of kick-off meeting.

Task 2. Project Description
ICF will prepare the Project description in accordance with City of Menlo Park Planning Division requirements. The Project description will be based on input provided by the Project applicant, including Project plans/entitlements and background studies. A complete and stable Project description will form the basis for the environmental review. The Project description will include, at a minimum, the following general topics:
§ Project Overview and Background
§ Project Site Location
§ Project Objectives
Page G-8.30
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 11 § Project Characteristics, including:
• Site plan
• Residential population and employment levels
• Site access, circulation, and parking
• TDM program
• Project design, architectural themes, massing, building design, potential sustainable design features, and materials
• Amenities such as landscaping, lighting, signage, courtyards, and gathering spaces • Utilities
• Recycling and waste
§ Phasing and Construction Scenario
§ Project Approvals and Entitlements
§ Figures
Deliverables: One electronic copy of each draft and final version of the Project description (in MS Word and PDF formats)
Task 3. Notice of Preparation and Public Scoping
ICF will prepare a Notice of Preparation (NOP) consistent with City guidelines, then file the NOP with the County Clerk and State Clearinghouse (a Notice of Completion [NOC] will also be submitted to the State Clearinghouse). This SOW and budget assumes that the City will send the required documents to the State Clearinghouse and distribute the NOP to all other recipients. ICF staff members will attend the public scoping meeting. This scope does not include preparation of a staff report. After the meeting, ICF will prepare a brief summary of the written and verbal comments, sorted by topic, and refine the EIR SOW based on discussions with the staff (as required), input obtained from scoping sessions, and comments submitted on the NOP.

Deliverables: Electronic copies of the draft and revised NOP in MS Word and Adobe PDF format.

Ten hard copies and electronic copies of the final NOP in MS Word and Adobe PDF format for City use. Electronic copy of the NOC in Adobe PDF format. Distribution of NOP as noted above.

Summary of written and verbal comments. Revised SOW (as required).

Task 4. Administrative Draft EIR
The purpose of this task is to prepare the administrative draft EIR. This task will synthesize background information for use in the existing setting, evaluate changes to baseline conditions resulting from implementation of the Project, compare impacts to the significance criteria to identify significant impacts, and identify mitigation measures to reduce potentially significant impacts to a less-than-significant level.

For this task, there will be three principal activities:
§ Determine, by individual resource topic, the significance criteria to be used in the analysis; § Perform the analysis and make determinations of impact significance; and § Recommend feasible mitigation measures to reduce impacts, if needed.

The ICF team will collect the information necessary to define baseline conditions in the Project area.

It is anticipated that CEQA baseline conditions will be existing conditions at the time of the NOP.

Page G-8.31
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 12 For each environmental topic, significance thresholds or criteria will be defined in consultation with the City so that it will be clear how the EIR classifies an impact. The criteria will be based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, general plan standards used by the City, and our experience in developing performance standards and planning guidelines to minimize impacts.

The analysis will be based on standard methodologies and techniques, focusing on the net changes anticipated at the Project site. The text will clearly link measures to impacts and indicate their effectiveness (i.e., ability to reduce an impact to a less-than-significant level), identify the responsible agency or party, and distinguish whether measures are proposed as part of the Project, are already being implemented (such as existing regulations), or are to be considered.

Our analysis will also assess whether proposed mitigation measures themselves would result in any environmental impacts. This approach facilitates preparation of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) that follows certification of an EIR.

The administrative draft EIR will incorporate baseline conditions data as well as impact analysis and mitigation measures, along with the alternatives and other CEQA considerations described in Task 6 (below). It is envisioned that the City’s initial review of the document will consider content, accuracy, the validity of assumptions, classification of impacts, feasibility of mitigation measures, and alternatives analyses.

For purposes of providing a cost estimate, we assume that a full EIR will be prepared that will evaluate the following topics in detail: aesthetics, air quality/greenhouse gas emissions, biological resources, cultural resources/tribal cultural resources, energy, geology/soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology/water quality, land use/planning, noise, population/housing, public services, recreation, transportation, and utilities/service systems. If this list changes during the scoping process, ICF will provide an update to the scope and cost. As needed, ICF will prepare technical memorandums and/or provide a peer review of reports prepared by other consultants, as outlined in the scope below. The budget and scope for these memorandums and peer reviews are included in Task 4, Administrative Draft EIR, since they will be incorporated directly into the Administrative Draft EIR upon completion.

ICF anticipates that all other topics will be “scoped out” from further analysis in the EIR.

Section 15128 of the CEQA Guidelines states that “An EIR shall contain a statement briefly indicating the reasons that various possible significant effects of a project were determined not to be significant and were therefore not discussed in detail in the EIR.” Accordingly, the EIR will include a section for impacts found to be less than significant. This section will discuss topics that, based on preliminary desktop analysis of the Project, ICF believes will not result in significant environmental impacts. These topics are agriculture and forestry resources, mineral resources, and wildfire.

For the cumulative impact analysis, ICF will create a map of cumulative projects within the vicinity of the Project site, based on a City-provided cumulative project list. The list will be found in the Setting section of Chapter 3, Introduction to Environmental Analysis, for localized cumulative analyses (e.g., construction analyses). For other analyses (e.g., regional air quality), the cumulative context will be defined as broader geographic areas, according to the resource.

The following task descriptions summarize the data to be collected, impact assessment methodologies to be used, and types of mitigation measures to be considered, by environmental issue. Optional Tasks are described at the end of this scope. Since they require further consideration and discussion, the scope and budget are provided separately to readily distinguish between the proposed and optional tasks.

Aesthetics
The aesthetics analysis will consider site-specific Project impacts as well as impacts viewed from surrounding areas. The Project site is relatively flat and currently occupied by buildings of varying heights; the majority are less than three stories high. Therefore, the existing buildings are not Page G-8.32
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 13 dominant features in the area. However, the Project would introduce new buildings that would be larger with respect to scale, height, and massing. ICF will prepare the Aesthetics section of the EIR, based on information provided, and conduct the following tasks:
§ Visit the Project site and surroundings to identify and photo-document existing visual character and quality, views to and from the Project site, and other urban design features. § Review the massing studies/visual simulations, landscape plans, lighting plans, and shadow diagrams (if applicable) provided by the Project Sponsor. § Review existing and proposed general plan goals, policies, and programs related to visual quality to determine conflicts with any relevant plans and policies. The surrounding public sensitive-viewer locations that could be affected by the proposed development include Burgess Park and the Civic Center complex.
§ Using visual simulations and field observations, analyze whether the Project would conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality due to grading, height, bulk, massing, architectural style, building materials, or other site alterations. § Analyze lighting and glare impacts created by the proposed buildings, focusing on motorists on the surrounding streets, residents in the Linfield Oaks neighborhood, city hall, adjacent churches, Menlo-Atherton High School, and other sensitive-viewer locations.

Shadows would increase compared with existing conditions because of the increase in building heights. However, based on the direction of the sun, the public uses at Burgess Park would not be affected by the increased shadows. If shadow diagrams are provided by the Project Sponsor, ICF will incorporate them into the overall aesthetics analysis. However, if the applicant does not submit shadow diagrams to ICF and it is determined that shadows should be evaluated in the EIR, then the scope and budget could be amended to prepare shadow diagrams using a shadow subconsultant.

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
ICF will prepare the air quality and greenhouse gas (GHG) chapters of the EIR. The Project site is within the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB) as well as the jurisdiction of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). The analysis will focus on the criteria pollutants, toxic air contaminants (TACs), and GHGs of greatest concern in the SFBAAB and local plan area. ICF will summarize meteorological and climatological data for the plan area as well as ambient pollutant concentrations in the vicinity of the plan area. ICF will describe the general locations of existing and proposed sensitive receptors as well as ambient sources of TACs near the plan area. Existing state and federal ambient air quality standards, the region’s attainment status with regard to the standards, and a discussion of applicable air quality and climate change goals, policies, and plans, including the region’s most recent air quality plans and the City’s 2030 Climate Action Plan (2030 CAP), will be provided.

The impact analysis for the proposed Project will assess the items listed below. The analyses will be detailed and presented in a technical memorandum, which will be used to inform the EIR impact conclusions. The technical memorandum will be appended to the EIR. This SOW assumes preparation of a draft and final technical memorandum. ICF further assumes that comments received on the draft memorandum will not require modeling revisions.

Construction. ICF will work with the Project Sponsor to develop an inventory of typical construction equipment and a list of activities for the expected buildout phases of the Project. We will quantify criteria pollutant and GHG emissions to the extent feasible, based on available Project-specific information. Where adequate information is not available, model defaults from the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) will be used to characterize construction activity. The analysis of construction impacts will consider the construction-related control strategies recommended by BAAQMD, including adherence to BAAQMD rules and regulations. Estimated criteria pollutant emissions will be compared to BAAQMD’s construction thresholds, as defined in the Page G-8.33
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 14 agency’s most recently adopted CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. If emissions are found to be significant, mitigation measures will be developed and quantified to the extent feasible to address identified impacts. This SOW assumes construction emissions will be quantified for the proposed Project and one variant.

Operations: ICF will quantify criteria pollutant and GHG emissions from motor vehicles using VMT data from the traffic consultant as well as the Emission Factor (EMFAC) model. Operational emissions associated with building area sources, energy and water consumption, waste generation, stationary sources (if any), and land use changes will be estimated using CalEEMod and land use data from the Project Sponsor. ICF understands that the Project would replace or consolidate SRI International’s existing facilities, with no net increase in nonresidential square footage. Given the age of the existing facilities and the proposed sustainability features for the new buildings, it is likely that operational emissions from nonresidential sources will decline relative to existing conditions. The proposed new residential buildings will likewise incorporate sustainability features that will reduce the intensity of operational emissions.

Emissions will be quantified under existing conditions as well as future buildout conditions with and without the proposed Project (and up to one variant). ICF will work with the Project Sponsor to quantify and incorporate, to the extent feasible, the reductions achieved through the robust sustainability program, including, but not limited to, the all-electric building design, onsite renewable energy generation, low-flow water fixtures, transit proximity, and TDM program. Many of the proposed sustainability features are similar to strategies included in the 2021 Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity: Designed for Local Governments, Communities, and Project Developers (Handbook). As the principal author of the Handbook, ICF has a fundamental understanding of all Handbook measures and the associated quantification methods.

The net change in criteria pollutant emissions between existing and future conditions will be compared to BAAQMD’s operational thresholds. If emissions are found to be significant, mitigation measures will be developed and quantified to the extent feasible to address identified impacts.

Although the City recently (2021) adopted the 2030 CAP, it is not a qualified CAP for CEQA tiering.

BAAQMD has adopted updated GHG thresholds for projects and plans as well as revisions to its CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. ICF understands that the Project Sponsor may request a review of the Project under the provisions of Senate Bill (SB) 7, in which case the Project would be designed to achieve net-zero GHG emissions (refer to Optional Task, below. The ultimate GHG threshold(s) will therefore be selected in close coordination with the Project Sponsor and the City and will consider all applicable case law as well as air district and expert agency guidance.

Health Effects from Criteria Pollutant Emissions. In response to the Supreme Court decision in Sierra Club v. County of Fresno, ICF will discuss potential regional and localized health effects from increased criteria pollutant emissions. This SOW assumes the analysis will both qualitatively and generally describe the health risks associated with exposure to the types of criteria pollutant emissions expected under the Project. ICF will review attainment plans for San Mateo County and community health data published by the California Department of Public Health to support the analysis. No Project-specific modeling will be performed. Should the City prefer a quantitative analysis of potential changes in regional health risks with buildout of the proposed Project, ICF can develop a scope for conducting photochemical modeling.

Localized Carbon Monoxide Hot Spots. ICF will review the expected impact on regional VMT and traffic circulation from buildout of the Project. The analysis will consider Project design features that may reduce VMT and/or congestion, including bicycle lanes, pedestrian facilities, and a TDM program. Trends in ambient carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations will also be assessed to confirm that buildout of the Project would not result in the formation of CO hot spots. If a hot-spot analysis is determined to be necessary, ICF will use peak-hour traffic volumes from the traffic consultant, the California Line Source Dispersion Model (CALINE4), and the latest version of EMFAC to estimate CO concentrations at the worst-performing intersection identified by the traffic study (i.e., the Page G-8.34
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 15 intersection with the highest peak-hour volumes and vehicle delay). Modeled CO concentrations will be compared to the federal and state ambient air quality standards to show that buildout of the Project would not result in a violation.

Project-Level TACs. The primary TACs of concern are diesel particulate matter (DPM) and asbestos. The potential for asbestos exposure from the demolition of facilities will be qualitatively assessed, based on compliance with BAAQMD’s asbestos rules.

Residential and educational receptors are located within 1,000 feet of the Project area. Buildout of the Project would cite new residential receptors on the Project site. Existing offsite receptors may be exposed to DPM generated during construction of the Project as well as operational sources of DPM, such as emergency generators (if any) and loading docks. Future new receptors may likewise be exposed to such sources as well existing ambient risks (e.g., surrounding roadways, stationary sources).

Given the proximity of surrounding receptors and the expected duration and intensity of construction, ICF proposes to quantitatively evaluate potential health risks from construction. ICF will prepare a construction health risk assessment (HRA) using the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) AERMOD dispersion model. The HRA will be consistent with methodologies and procedures recommended by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), California Air Resources Board (CARB), and BAAQMD. The HRA will evaluate potential cancer and non-cancer health hazards for offsite receptors within 1,000 feet of the Project boundary related to exposures to construction-generated DPM and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5).

Modeled health risks at receptor locations will be compared to thresholds recommended by BAAQMD. If needed, ICF will identify measures to reduce the level of health risk exposure at affected receptor locations.

This SOW assumes that construction of the Project will occur in a single phase, with nonresidential and residential vertical improvements happening over 30 to 36 months. Because all buildings would be constructed concurrently, new onsite residential receptors would not be exposed to construction emissions. Should the approach change and residential uses would be constructed and occupied before the completion of construction, ICF can revise the scope to reflect the additional level of effort needed to analyze construction-related health risks for onsite receptors.

With regard to long-term operations, ICF assumes that Project-related sources of TACs would be limited to off-street loading activities and the use of emergency generators. Accordingly, operational health risks would be evaluated qualitatively because the extent of loading activities at R&D facilities is expected to be limited and onsite emergency generators would be required to comply with the BAAQMD permitting process. ICF has included an optional task that would involve conducting an operational HRA, should the Project Sponsor or City prefer a quantitative assessment of potential operational health risks from receptor exposure to Project-generated DPM.

Cumulative TACs. ICF will use BAAQMD’s Permitted Sources Risk and Hazards Map to identify stationary sources and associated health risks within 1,000 feet of new residential areas. Health risks will be adjusted, based on distance to the Project site, using BAAQMD’s distance multiplier tools. BAAQMD will confirm the identified stationary sources through a Stationary Source Data Request. ICF will use BAAQMD’s geographic information system (GIS) files to identify health risks at the Project site from exposure to emissions generated by nearby railways and roadways. Total stationary, railway, and roadway risks will be added and compared to BAAQMD’s cumulative thresholds. If risks exceed thresholds, ICF will identify control measures to reduce the impact.

Odors. New land uses developed under the Project are not expected to result in substantial odor emissions. Likewise, any odors generated during construction (e.g., from diesel fuel combustion) are expected to minor. ICF will therefore qualitatively assess odor emissions, based on guidance from BAAQMD, including compliance with applicable rules and regulations.

Page G-8.35
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 16 Plan Consistency. ICF will qualitatively evaluate the plan’s consistency with state and local air quality and climate change plans and regulations, including the 2017 Clean Air Plan: Spare the Air, Cool the Climate, Plan Bay Area 2050, the City’s 2030 CAP, SB 32, Executive Order B-55-18, and the 2017/2022 Scoping Plan.

Biological Resources
The existing site is developed with buildings and surface parking lots. As such, natural biological resources are likely to be minimal. Nonetheless, the Project site is does contain 1,375 trees and landscaping, which could be protected and/or provide habitat for nesting birds. ICF will perform the following tasks:
§ Conduct background research to determine the biological resources that could be affected by the Project such as special-status species or protected trees. This research will include review of the City’s protected tree ordinance, the use of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Special-Status Species Online Database, and the California Native Plant Society’s online inventory. An aerial photograph of the Project site will be reviewed to identify areas of habitat types that can later be confirmed through field verification. § Conduct a site visit to characterize potential special-status plant and wildlife habitat that may be present. A list of plant and wildlife species observed during the survey will be collected and presented in the analyses. Given the developed nature of the Project site, it is not expected that special-status species will be present; however, a site visit will be required to make this determination.
§ Evaluate the Project’s effects on the identified biological resources, and recommend mitigation as warranted. Based on prior experience in the region, and the urban nature of the site, ICF anticipates that the prominent issues for the Project would be limited to nesting migratory birds, roosting bats, and protected trees.
§ Integrate the results of an arborist report prepared by the Project Sponsor team, if available. § Evaluate the Project’s effects on the identified biological resources, and recommend mitigation, as warranted.

Cultural Resources/Tribal Cultural Resources
ICF cultural resources personnel will conduct a cultural resources study, as described below, to identify cultural resources that could meet the CEQA definition of a historical resource (California Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21084) or unique archaeological resource (PRC Section 21083.2) and could be affected by the Project.

Built-Environment Cultural Resources Analysis. ICF will peer review the Historic Resource Evaluation Report prepared by Page & Turnbull that documents the site’s history and evaluates the historic significance of the campus and its 38 buildings. In addition, ICF will document the findings of the peer review of the Historic Resource Evaluation Report prepared by Page & Turnbull in a technical memorandum. For the purposes of estimating the level of effort required to analyze the Project’s impact on built-environment historical resources, ICF assumes that, based on the significance and history of the property, the Project’s Historic Resource Evaluation Report will identify up to five built-environment historical resources, inclusive of one historic district, within the study area.

Based on the Project and the existing urban context of the campus, ICF assumes that the CEQA study area for cultural resources will be limited to the Project footprint but will confirm this assumption with a site visit. Within an area of urban development, for a project that is consistent with adjacent density, there is little potential for visual, auditory, or indirect impacts on adjacent historical resources. Furthermore, with evaluation of the whole campus, it is anticipated that the CEQA study area for cultural resources will be limited to the Project footprint. ICF assumes that no additional Page G-8.36
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 17 resources within the study area will require evaluation with respect to listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). No evaluations of CRHR eligibility are included in this SOW.

Archaeological Cultural Resources Analysis. ICF will conduct a records search at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) at Sonoma State University, the official state repository for cultural resource reports and records for San Mateo County, to identify previously recorded cultural resources and studies within and adjacent to the Project site. The records search will include a 0.25- mile radius. As part of the records search, ICF will contact the Native American Heritage Commission in Sacramento to request a review of the Sacred Lands File.

As part of the records search, ICF will also review published archaeological, geological, and soil data to characterize the potential for buried surfaces (paleosols) within the Project site because some paleosols have the potential to be associated with archaeological deposits and human remains.

In addition to the records review, a qualified archaeologist will conduct a pedestrian surface survey of the Project site to identify archaeological resources and document current site conditions. If archaeological deposits are identified, they will be documented on a Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 form but not formally evaluated for significance under the CRHR. Formal evaluation, delineation, and/or mitigation would need to be implemented under an amendment to this SOW. The information obtained from the above will be summarized in a brief archaeological cultural resources technical report of findings. The technical report will be submitted to the NWIC in fulfillment of a requirement to access their archives.

Tribal Cultural Resources and Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1, Assistance. Prior to release of a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or EIR for a project, a lead agency must provide an opportunity for consultation with tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area in which the project is located. Such consultation must be conducted if requested by the tribes in writing within 30 days of notification of the proposed project. ICF will conduct the following tasks:
§ Provide a draft and final notification letter to tribal contacts on official City letterhead. § Incorporate the results of the tribal consultation and any agreed-upon mitigation measures into a Tribal Cultural Resources EIR section, which will be separate from the Cultural Resources section.

Assumptions
§ ICF does not anticipate encountering archaeological resources. If archaeological resources are encountered, they will be documented on a DPR 523 form. Formal archaeological resource delineation and evaluation are not included in this scope and cost and would need to be performed under an amendment to this contract.
§ ICF assumes that the Historic Resource Evaluation Report will meet industry standards and that the peer review will suggest only minor revisions. § ICF assumes, based on the significance and history of the property, the Historic Resource Evaluation Report will identify up to five built-environment historical resources, inclusive of one historic district, within the study area.
§ ICF assumes that no additional built-environment resources will be located within the study area that will require evaluation for listing in the CRHR. If additional built-environment resources are identified, ICF will prepare an additional scope and cost. § The City will provide ICF with written documentation regarding consultation and the results for incorporation into the Tribal Cultural Resources section. § The City will be responsible for mailing the tribal notification letters and conducting any follow-up correspondence.

Page G-8.37
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 18 § This scope assumes no meeting attendance by ICF cultural personnel in support of PRC Section 21080.3.1, Consultation. If requested, ICF can attend meetings, but a revision to this SOW and cost estimate will be necessary.
§ ICF assumes that no more than one round of review will be required by the City prior to finalization of the cultural resources and tribal cultural resources deliverables.

Energy
ICF will examine how the Project will affect energy resources, energy generation, and energy transmission and evaluate any potential impacts associated with the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy during Project construction or operation. The analysis will be based on energy use outputs from the CalEEMod emissions model. In addition, ICF will evaluate the Project’s consistency with state and local energy efficiency goals. The analysis will consider potential differences in long-term operational uses (i.e., differences between existing and proposed land uses) as well as the building design and energy efficiency features shown in the plans.

Geology, Soils, and Paleontological Resources
ICF will prepare the Geology, Soils, and Paleontological Resources section of the EIR, using the geotechnical report prepared for the Project. This SOW assumes that a geotechnical report that characterizes geological, seismic, and soil hazards at the Project site will be prepared. ICF will rely on the information included in the geotechnical report to characterize the existing setting for geology, soils, and seismicity. In addition, ICF will use existing mapping to identify the geologic units that underlie the Project site and conduct a database search at the University of California Museum of Paleontology, including a review of scientific literature, to assess the paleontological potential of the geologic units and characterize the setting for paleontological resources.

ICF will conduct the following tasks:
§ Describe existing federal, state, and local laws and regulations related to geology, soils, and seismicity as well as paleontological resources.
§ Describe the Project grading, excavation, and foundation systems designed to support the proposed structures.
§ Describe the proposed maximum depth of excavation.
§ Describe the recommendations made in the geotechnical report, which would be implemented to reduce any impacts.
§ Develop, as needed, mitigation measures to reduce any significant impacts to a less-thansignificant level or eliminate, if feasible. Typical mitigation measures for paleontological resources include an assessment by a qualified paleontological professional regarding the need for the paleontological monitoring and, if recommended, worker awareness training.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
ICF will prepare the Hazards and Hazardous Materials section of the EIR to assess impacts associated with the Project. The affected environment and regulatory setting pertaining to hazards and hazardous materials in the study area, including past activities on the Project site, and the potential for human and environmental exposure to hazardous materials will also be assessed. ICF will use a previously prepared Phase I environmental site assessment and site assessment report (both technical documents to be provided by the City prior to initiating the analysis) in support of the hazards and hazardous materials findings and impact determinations. If deemed necessary, ICF will conduct a supplemental public agency database review through the State Water Resources Control Board’s GeoTracker and the Department of Toxic Substances Control’s EnviroStor online databases. The objective of the environmental database searches is to identify and evaluate potential environmental issues associated with past and/or present operations at the Project site. This data would then be used in support of the CEQA document. An assessment of the significance of impacts associated with Page G-8.38
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 19 hazards and hazardous materials will be based on the relevant regulatory framework. If significant impacts are identified, mitigation measures to reduce them to a less-than-significant level (where feasible) will be recommended. The analysis and findings will be presented in the EIR.

Technical Document Peer Review. ICF will conduct a peer review of both technical documents mentioned above (Phase I environmental site assessment and site assessment report). Our technical expert will conduct a review to determine the adequacy of the analysis with respect to compliance with latest industry practices and methodologies. The review will be limited to ensuring that the text in the reports adequately presents the findings and that the conclusions are sound and substantiated. It should be noted that this will not include a review of any appendices attached to either report (appendices will be used only as a reference). Comments will be made directly in the report’s electronic files.

Hydrology and Water Quality
ICF will provide a detailed summary of existing conditions, identify potential impacts, and, if necessary, develop mitigation measures for the Project related to hydrology and water quality. Project activities that have the potential to result in hydrology and water quality impacts include the alteration of drainage patterns and runoff, ground disturbance during construction, and changes in groundwater infiltration and recharge.

ICF will review existing information and resources related to hydrology and water quality to conduct the analyses. This will include researching the hydrologic characteristics of the area; searching online resources, including federal, state, and local regulatory agency databases, such as the State Water Resources Control Board’s Integrated Water Quality Report/Clean Water Act data and the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s national flood hazard data; and reviewing relevant groundwater and water quality studies, Regional Water Quality Control Board reports, and California Department of Water Resources documents pertaining to the Project area. The Hydrology and Water Quality section of the EIR will provide a detailed discussion of existing conditions as well as hydrology and water resource impacts associated with the Project. The impact analysis will focus on the impact of construction on water resources as well as impacts from surface water runoff and other operational issues. The section will address the potential for increased runoff as a result of the Project and any related impacts on drainage systems in the city or downstream of the Project site. Existing infrastructure and the identified floodplains will also be considered. A qualitative water quality analysis will be included that will consider the sources and types of pollutants, based on the previous and proposed land uses. Water quality impairments that may result from Project inundation within the identified floodplains will also be addressed. Impacts both within the Project area and the region downstream will be addressed. Any reasonable mitigation measures needed to address significant adverse hydrology and water quality impacts will be listed. Cumulative impacts resulting from the cumulative effect of development within the surrounding area will also be evaluated.

The Hydrology and Water Quality section will include a regulatory setting; a discussion of existing surface hydrology, groundwater, surface water and groundwater quality, and flooding in the area; the potential impacts of the Project on hydrology and water quality; and mitigation measures to reduce the impacts. Figures will also be prepared, if necessary, to show existing conditions with respect to hydrology.

Land Use and Planning
Land use and planning generally considers the compatibility of a proposed project with neighboring uses, changes to or displacement of existing uses, compliance with zoning regulations, and the consistency of a proposed project with the relevant local land use policies that have been adopted to mitigate or avoid an environmental effect. With respect to land use conflicts or compatibility issues, the magnitude of the impacts depends on how a proposed project would affect the existing development pattern, development intensity, traffic circulation, noise, and the visual setting in the surrounding area. These are generally discussed in the respective sections. Therefore, for the land use and planning analysis, ICF will conduct the following tasks:

Page G-8.39
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 20 § Describe the existing land uses, intensities, and land use patterns in the vicinity of the Project site as well as the compatibility of the proposed uses and zoning with current onsite and offsite development.
§ Describe the Project’s consistency with housing element goals geared toward strengthening the jobs/housing ratio in the city.
§ Describe the Project’s potential to divide an established community. § Evaluate any potential conflicts between the proposed and current land uses that would result in environmental impacts. These conflicts could include a use that would create a nuisance for adjacent properties or result in incompatibility with surrounding land uses, such as differences in the physical scale of development, noise levels, traffic levels, or hours of operation.
§ Evaluate the extent to which adopted City development standards or proposed design standards, as outlined in the Project application and other planning documents, would eliminate or minimize potential conflicts within the Project site. The general plan and zoning ordinance, among other applicable plans, will be examined, and the Project’s consistency with the applicable portions of the plans will be described.

Noise
ICF noise and vibration specialists will prepare a technical memorandum to evaluate potential Project-related impacts. The technical memorandum will inform the Noise and Vibration section of the EIR. The analysis will address:
§ Exposure of existing noise-sensitive land uses to noise and vibration associated with construction activity at the Project site.
§ Exposure of existing noise-sensitive land uses to Project-related changes in traffic noise. § Exposure of existing noise-sensitive land uses to operational noise from the Project site. It is anticipated that this will include an analysis of noise from emergency generators; noise from heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) equipment; and noise from operations at Project loading docks.
§ Exposure of proposed noise-sensitive uses on the Project site to Project-related noise sources, as appropriate per relevant CEQA case law.

In the regulatory setting, the discussion will focus on local noise standards and guidance. Other applicable noise and/or vibration standards, if applicable, will also be summarized in the document.

In the environmental setting section, existing sources of noise in the Project area will be identified, along with existing noise-sensitive land uses in the area. Based on a desktop review of the Project area, noise-sensitive land uses include single- and multi-family residences, preschools, a high school, children’s centers, recreational facilities, and commercial and light-industrial uses. Other sources of noise may include aircraft noise, noise from landscaping equipment on surrounding parcels, and other typical residential neighborhood noise sources.

To determine the baseline noise levels, ICF will conduct noise monitoring at selected locations, as follows:
§ Short-term noise monitoring (15 minutes or less) will be conducted at up to five locations in the Project area.
§ Continuous long-term monitoring (24 hours or more) will be conducted at up to five locations in the Project area.

Page G-8.40
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 21 Construction noise and vibration will be evaluated using the modeling methods recommended by the U.S. Department of Transportation and the construction equipment data to be provided by the Project Sponsor.

Operational traffic noise will be evaluated at a maximum of 20 roadway segments under the following conditions, using the Federal Highway Administration’s Traffic Noise Model and average annual daily traffic data to be provided by the traffic consultant:
§ Existing
§ Existing plus Project
§ Future
§ Future plus Project
Traffic noise will be evaluated in terms of how Project-related traffic noise increases may affect existing noise-sensitive land uses. It is assumed that traffic data provided by the traffic consultant will include average annual daily traffic volumes, posted speeds, and heavy-truck percentages for each roadway segment analyzed. Non-traffic noise generated by facility operations (such as HVAC equipment, emergency generators, parking lots, and/or operational loading docks) will be evaluated using standard acoustical modeling methods and operational data provided by the Project Sponsor.

The analysis of vibration will be consistent with the requirements of the City, including ConnectMenlo, the municipal code, and/or other applicable noise and/or vibration standards, such as California Department of Transportation guidance.

The development of thresholds by which to assess potential noise and vibration impacts will be based on CEQA Appendix G and relevant local, state, and federal noise and vibration regulations.

An assessment of the significance of noise impacts will be based on predicted noise exposures and the defined CEQA significance thresholds. Where significant noise impacts are identified, mitigation to reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level (where feasible) will be identified. Noise mitigation will be described at a level of detail appropriate for environmental review and not at a design level of detail.

In the event that another firm prepares a technical noise analysis that evaluates the noise impacts of the Project, as described above, ICF will review the technical report to assess its completeness, accuracy, and defensibility. This SOW assumes that a technical report prepared by another firm will include an appropriate level of substantiation for ICF to review, including the results of traffic noise modeling, construction noise modeling, construction vibration modeling, and operational noisesource (e.g., HVAC systems, emergency generators, etc.) modeling. Under a peer-review approach, this SOW assumes that ICF will not conduct a detailed quality assessment of the modeling results and will not conduct any original modeling or “retrace” any steps taken by the other firm. ICF’s noise team will participate in up to two conference calls to discuss the technical report. The conference calls will be held to discuss the team’s comments on the technical report and for the other firm to provide clarification, if needed.

Assumptions:
§ Required construction and operational data and/or input assumptions will be provided by the Project Sponsor.
§ Traffic data (including average annual daily traffic volumes, posted speeds, and heavy-truck percentages for each roadway segment) will be provided by the traffic consultant. § Non-traffic operational noise sources would be limited to HVAC equipment, emergency generators, and operational loading docks (e.g., no event noise or other mechanical equipment noise would need to be assessed).

Page G-8.41
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 22 Population and Housing
Due to the settlement agreement with East Palo Alto, the increase in the number of employees and residents at the Project site, and the public interest in this topic, ICF proposes to do a full analysis of potential impacts related to population and housing. The Project would include office, R&D, and amenity uses, which would generate new employees at the Project site. In addition, the Project would include approximately 400 rental housing units, directly increasing the population in the city.

ICF will analyze the impact of the increase in employees and residents. The Population and Housing section of the EIR will examine the Project’s effects on population and housing in the city and, to a lesser extent, the region. This analysis will focus on the increase in population and the secondary effects associated with the housing needed to accommodate the increased employment that would result from the Project. ICF, with assistance from KMA, will undertake the following tasks:
§ ICF will obtain additional information from the Project Sponsor, including the number of existing employees at the Project site and information regarding how many employees could also live at the proposed housing, if available.
§ An HNA will be prepared by KMA (Appendix B). ICF will work closely with KMA throughout the process and peer review the HNA before incorporating the findings into the analysis. § The housing effect resulting from the Project will be discussed in the context of the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) regional household forecasts and fair-share housing allocations.
§ ICF will evaluate the direct population impacts from the proposed housing at the Project site. § Similar to other job-intensive projects, the EIR will examine secondary housing demands, based on future residential patterns for Project employees. § One of the key terms of the settlement agreement between the City of Menlo Park and the City of East Palo Alto is that an HNA will be prepared when the preparation of an EIR is required. As required by the settlement agreement, the HNA prepared for the Project will include an analysis of the multiplier effect with respect to indirect and induced employment to the extent possible.

Public Services and Recreation
Using information received from various service providers, ICF will prepare the Public Services and Recreation section of the EIR. ICF will conduct the following tasks:
§ As necessary, conduct interviews with or provide questionnaires to the City’s police department, fire department, park and recreation department, school district, and library to determine current service levels and the capacity to serve increased demand. § Estimate Project-generated demand for public services, based on existing operational standards obtained from the service providers. Other measures of demand will also be considered, such as the projected increase in the calls for service and the projected demand of recreational facilities and library services.
§ In accordance with CEQA, evaluate the extent to which Project demands would trigger the need for new public facilities, the construction of which might result in physical environmental effects.
§ Considering the proposed onsite open space, analyze the change in access to existing recreation facilities and any associated deterioration of these facilities.

Transportation
The SOW for the transportation analysis is included in Appendix C (Hexagon). ICF will help oversee preparation of the transportation analysis. All results will be incorporated into the EIR.

Page G-8.42
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 23 Utilities/Service Systems
The Utilities/Services Systems section of the EIR will examine the Project’s effect on water supply, wastewater treatment, solid waste disposal, and energy generation and transmission. ICF will describe existing conditions (i.e., capacity and current consumption levels), identify Project impacts (i.e., the effects of demand weighed against infrastructure capacity), and work with the City and the utility providers to identify reasonable mitigation measures.

This SOW assumes that the Project Sponsor will provide adequate information on infrastructure planning for the Project, including an assessment of existing and future utilities in the Project area/vicinity. Any technical analysis of the sizing, location, or design for new infrastructure is not included in this scope and is assumed to be provided by the Project Sponsor or other parties. This includes the location of potential water, sewer, natural gas, or electricity transmission lines for an assessment of the potential environmental impacts of new utilities. ICF can estimate solid waste generation, based on readily available generation rates. The energy demand will be quantified using the CalEEMod model. A water supply assessment (WSA) would be prepared by either a subconsultant contracted directly with the City, or West Yost contracted under ICF (see Optional Tasks, below). ICF will review the WSA, provide comments (if necessary), and incorporate the WSA into the administrative draft EIR.

Based on technical information for the Project site, as well as information received from the utility providers, ICF will prepare the Utilities/Service Systems section of the EIR and conduct the following tasks:
• Discuss applicable regulations at the local, state, and federal level, where applicable. • Describe existing utility providers, system capacity, and improvement plans. • Evaluate the net change in the demand for water, wastewater, solid waste, and energy relative to existing and planned capacity for the utilities. • Discuss whether Project impacts would require the expansion of existing facilities or construction of new infrastructure or facilities.

Deliverables: One electronic copy of administrative draft EIR in MS Word and Adobe PDF format.

Task 5. Project Alternatives, Other CEQA Considerations, and Project Variant
The purpose of this task is to complete drafts of the remaining sections (Alternatives, Other CEQA Considerations, and the Project Variant) of the EIR for the City’s staff to review. This task involves preparation of other required sections, examining particular aspects of the Project’s effects and the identification and comparison of Project alternatives.

Other CEQA Considerations
This task involves documenting unavoidable adverse impacts, growth-inducing effects, and cumulative effects of the Project:
§ Unavoidable effects will be summarized from the analyses performed in Task 5. § Assessment of growth-inducing effects will be based on the economic multipliers for the proposed uses (these multipliers provide information on direct and induced growth and were developed by ABAG for the regional input-output model) as well as comparisons with ABAG projections for the city. Growth inducement will be discussed in the context of population increases, utility and public services demands, infrastructure, and land use.

Page G-8.43
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 24 § The energy use of the Project will be analyzed consistent with Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines. Although Appendix F is highly vague with respect to providing useable significance criteria, ICF will provide an energy analysis. It is probable that this analysis will conclude that the energy impacts would be less than significant because it is probable that the Project’s energy use will not be “wasteful,” “inefficient,” or “unnecessary.” Alternatives
The alternatives to the Project must serve to substantially avoid or reduce at least one, if not more, of the significant impacts identified for the Project while feasibly attaining most of the Project objectives. ICF assumes that at least three Project alternatives will be analyzed, both at a qualitative level and quantitative level, based on a sensitivity analysis to reduce identified impacts. The NoProject Alternative would be qualitatively analyzed. This could include a scenario in which existing entitlements are developed. This scope assumes that offsite alternatives will be dismissed because a large, suitable site is not available in the vicinity that would meet the Project Sponsor’s objectives.

The Project team will provide supporting evidence for that conclusion.

Project Variant
The Project would also include evaluation of a Project variant that would include up to 600 residential units. This would intensify residential uses within the proposed Residential Zoning District. The proposed variant would increase residential building heights within the district and add additional residential units on a separate 1-acre portion of the Project site.

The variant to the Project will be analyzed as a separate chapter in the EIR. As needed, the analysis will be quantitative; however, this scope and budget assume that the variant will not be analyzed at the same level of detail as the Project.

Deliverables: Other CEQA Considerations chapter to be submitted with administrative draft EIR in electronic MS Word and Adobe PDF format. Alternatives chapter and Project Variant chapter to be submitted with screencheck draft EIR in electronic MS Word and Adobe PDF format.

Task 6. Screencheck Draft EIR
The purpose of this task is to prepare the screencheck draft EIR for the City’s staff to review. ICF will prepare a screencheck draft EIR to respond to the City’s comments on the administrative draft EIR.

This scope assumes that comments from multiple reviewers will be consolidated, conflicting comments will be resolved, and that the comments will not result in substantial revisions or additional analyses.

Deliverables: One electronic copy of the screencheck draft EIR in MS Word and Adobe PDF format.

Task 7. Public Draft EIR
The purpose of this task is to prepare and submit the draft EIR to the City for distribution to the public. ICF will revise the screencheck draft EIR to incorporate modifications identified by the City.

The revised document will be circulated among the public agencies and the general public as well as specific individuals, organizations, and agencies that expressed an interest in receiving the document. During this task, ICF will also compile the appendices, which will be distributed with the draft EIR, and produce a version of the full document that can be uploaded onto the City’s website.

ICF will also prepare an NOC and a Notice of Availability (NOA) to accompany the copies that must be sent to the State Clearinghouse. This SOW and budget assume that the City will send the required documents to the State Clearinghouse and distribute the draft EIR to all other recipients.

This SOW includes printing the draft EIR. If requested by the City, ICF can revise the scope and budget to include distribution of the draft EIR.

Deliverables: Fifteen hard copies of the draft EIR, with flash-drive appendices. Print-ready and webready electronic copies of the draft EIR in MS Word and Adobe PDF format. Electronic copies of the NOC and NOA in MS Word and Adobe PDF format.

Page G-8.44
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 25 Task 8. Public Review and Hearings
The City will provide a 45-day review period, during which public agencies and the public will have an opportunity to review and comment on the draft EIR. ICF will be available to attend at least three public hearings during the public review period. ICF will prepare the PowerPoint presentation, present findings, and answer specific questions (the extent to which will be discussed with the City and Project Sponsor beforehand) at any or all of the public hearings. Similar to the NOP comments, ICF will prepare a summary of all public comments received during the public review period and identify any comments on topics not already in the initial study or draft EIR.

Deliverables: PowerPoint presentation, comment summary matrix, and corresponding memo.

Task 9. Draft Responses to Comments
The purpose of this task is to prepare responses to the comments received on the draft EIR and incorporate these responses into a responses-to-comments document for City and Project Sponsor review. The administrative final EIR will include:
§ Comments received on the draft EIR, including a list of all commenters, the full comment letters, and public meeting transcripts, with individual comments marked and numbered; and § Responses to all comments.

All substantive comments for each written and oral comment will be reviewed, bracketed, and coded for a response. Prior to preparing responses, ICF will meet with staff members to review the comments and suggest strategies for preparing responses. This step is desirable to ensure that all substantive comments will be addressed and that the appropriate level of response will be prepared.

This SOW and budget assume that ICF will prepare responses for up to 200 substantive, discrete non-repeating individual comments and coordinate integrating the responses prepared by other consultants. However, the number of public comments, as well as the content, is unknown at this time. Therefore, following the close of the draft EIR public review period and receipt of all public comments, if the comments exceed the scope of the assumptions above, including City-required responses, ICF will provide a revised budget for the Project Sponsor to cover this effort.

Frequently raised comments of a substantive nature may be responded to in a master response, which allows for a comprehensive response to be presented upfront for all interested commenters.

ICF will identify and recommend possible master responses for City consideration during the initial meeting to discuss strategies for preparing responses.

Following the strategy session, ICF will prepare master responses (as appropriate) and individual responses to the bracketed and coded comments. Individual responses to each comment letter will be placed immediately after the comment letter. As necessary, responses may indicate text revisions, in addition to clarifications and explanations. All text changes stemming from the responses to the comments, as well as those suggested by City staff members, will be compiled into an errata to be included as part of the final EIR. Our budget presumes that revisions to the draft EIR will be explanatory and clarifying in nature and will not require new technical or quantitative analysis.

Deliverables: One hard copy of the administrative draft responses-to-comments document.

Electronic copies of the administrative draft responses-to-comments document in MS Word and Adobe PDF format.

Task 10. Final EIR and Certification Hearings
Following City review of the administrative draft responses-to-comments document, ICF will address all comments received and prepare an administrative draft final EIR for City and Project Sponsor review. This document will contain the revised responses to comments and a full revised draft EIR.

The revised draft EIR will show all changes made in responses to comments in underline and strikethrough. Following City and Project Sponsor review of the administrative draft final EIR, ICF will Page G-8.45
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 26 prepare the final EIR, which will be sent to decision-makers. The final EIR will consist of the draft EIR (incorporating all revisions), the responses-to-comments document, the findings (part of Task 12), and the MMRP (part of Task 12). ICF will also prepare an NOC to accompany the copies that must be sent to the State Clearinghouse. This SOW and budget assume that the City will send the required documents to the State Clearinghouse and distribute the final EIR to all other recipients.

In addition, team members will attend and participate in up to three meetings to certify the EIR. If requested by City staff members, ICF will present the conclusions of the EIR and a summary of the comments and responses.

Upon certification and approval of the final EIR, ICF will prepare the Notice of Determination (NOD) to be filed with the State Clearinghouse. This SOW assumes that the City will file the NOD with the State Clearinghouse.

Deliverables: Fifteen hard copies of the final EIR, with flash-drive appendices. Print-ready and webready electronic copies of the final EIR in MS Word and Adobe PDF format. Electronic copies of the NOC and NOD in MS Word and Adobe PDF format.

Task 11. MMRP, Findings/Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Administrative Record
As part of this task, ICF will also prepare a draft and final MMRP for the Project, as required by Section 15097 of the CEQA Guidelines. The MMRP will be in a tabular format and include:
§ The mitigation measures to be implemented
§ The entity responsible for implementing a particular measure § The entity responsible for verifying that a particular measure has been completed § A monitoring milestone or action to mark implementation/completion of the mitigation measure
In conjunction with the City, ICF will prepare the Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines. CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance the economic, legal, social, and technological benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental impacts. The Statement of Overriding Considerations includes specific reasons in support of an action, based on the final EIR and other information in the record. ICF will also prepare CEQA Findings, describing each significant impact, including mitigation measures and alternatives.

ICF will also submit a full administrative record, documenting and providing backup for all information cited in the EIR. This will be submitted on a flash drive, with an accompanying matrix indexing each entry.

Deliverables: Electronic copies of the draft and final MMRP in MS Word and Adobe PDF format (if necessary). Fifteen hard copies of the final MMRP. Two electronic copies (on flash drive) of the administrative record (submitted at the draft EIR phase and the final EIR phase). Electronic copies of the Statement of Overriding Considerations and Findings in MS Word and Adobe PDF format.

Task 12. Project Management and Meetings
The purpose of this task is to effectively manage the above tasks and maintain communication with City staff members. ICF project management will be responsible for coordination activities, will maintain quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) requirements for document preparation, and will monitor the schedule and performance for all EIR work tasks. Project management subtasks also include maintaining internal communications among ICF staff members and subconsultants as well as City staff members and other team members through emails and frequent phone contact, along with preparation of all correspondence. The project manager will coordinate the internal staff, Project guidance, and analysis criteria.

Page G-8.46
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 27 This task also includes attending meetings to accomplish the above tasks. Team members will attend and participate in meetings on an as-needed basis. For purposes of the cost estimates, ICF has assumed 20 City staff member and/or Project Sponsor phone conference calls (excluding public hearings), in addition to a standing weekly call. These meetings are in addition to what is already assumed in the preceding tasks. Additional meetings may be appropriate during the course of this effort and will be invoiced on a time-and-materials basis.

In terms of progress reporting, ICF will prepare a brief progress report every month, documenting the key accomplishments regarding the CEQA process, schedule progress, and identification of any key issues that have arisen that may affect the EIR, budget, or schedule. ICF will also report key deliverable (e.g., administrative draft EIR) progress, both in terms of percent complete as well as costs incurred, to examine task burn rates and determine if cost progress is matching deliverable progress, as necessary.

Optional Tasks
Operational HRA
ICF will prepare a quantitative operational HRA using EPA’s AERMOD dispersion model. The HRA will be consistent with the methodologies and procedures recommended by OEHHA, CARB, and BAAQMD. The HRA will evaluate potential cancer and non-cancer health hazards for offsite receptors (i.e., within 1,000 feet) as well as onsite receptors from exposure to operational DPM and PM2.5. This SOW assumes that operational sources of DPM and PM2.5 would be limited to emergency generators and loading docks. Modeled health risks at receptor locations would be compared to thresholds recommended by BAAQMD. If needed, ICF will identify measures to reduce the level of health risk exposure at affected receptor locations.

Cost: $9,800
Water Supply Assessment
To fully analyze water supply and demand impacts under CEQA, ICF will need a WSA. Menlo Park Municipal Water provides service to the Project site. The WSA, if required, will be prepared by a consultant. Based on recent experience in Menlo Park, the City has contracted directly with a WSA consultant; the document from the consultant has been provided to ICF for incorporation into the utility sections of EIRs. However, should the City decide that the WSA consultant should be a subconsultant to ICF, ICF would team with West Yost. West Yost would evaluate water demands for buildout of the Project and prepare the WSA in accordance with the requirements of SB 610 (as adopted in the California Water Code as Sections 10910–10915). The full scope and budget for West Yost is included in Appendix D of this proposal.

Cost: $35,700
Senate Bill 7
As stated in the RFP, the applicant may decide to request a review of the Project under the provisions of SB 7 (Jobs and Economic Improvement through Environmental Leadership Act of 2021). SB 7 extends the expiration date of the previous Assembly Bill 900, the Environmental Leadership Development Project certification program.

ICF could assist with preparation of the appropriate record and analysis for the potential SB 7 environmental leadership project. Specifically, ICF could assist with the application process by preparing the GHG emissions methodology and documentation in accordance with CARB requirements. A comprehensive analysis of the Project’s GHG emissions could be performed to demonstrate the Project’s ability to meet the requirements of SB 7, which calls for no net additional emissions of GHGs, including GHG emissions from employee transportation. ICF could work with the client throughout the application process, including consultation meetings with CARB, to ensure that emissions quantification methodologies and potential mitigation measures are adequate and able to meet CARB’s requirements for review.

Page G-8.47
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 28 Prior to moving forward with this optional task, the applicant would need to demonstrate that the Project would meet a number of stringent labor and environmental requirements. If these requirements are met, the City and ICF would then need to discuss how to proceed and the level of involvement required by ICF. If the Project were to apply for SB 7, this would change the proposed scope for the GHG analysis. Because projects that qualify for streamlining under SB 7 are required to demonstrate that they would not result in any net additional emissions of GHGs, no potential significant impacts associated with GHG emissions would be anticipated from implementation of the Project. If this were to occur, the cost associated with the standard GHG CEQA analysis provided in this proposal would very likely be similar to the cost to prepare the SB 7 GHG analysis. However, this would need to be revisited once this decision is made. In addition, ICF could assist with posting all relevant Project records and information online within 3 to 5 days of receiving the material. If requested by the City, ICF could help with development and maintenance of this online record database. ICF would set up and develop a Drupal 9 database site. Site mockups, graphics, logos, and a style guide would be provided by our creative team. Content would be provided by ICF’s marketing team using GatherContent. Mapping of the PDF links to the respective files would be provided by ICF’s program team. The website content would be organized and prepared by this team at the start of the Project. Following that, ICF team members and City personnel would be required to upload Project emails, memorandums, reports, documents, and other ongoing correspondence to the site on a weekly basis. The cost for creation and maintenance of the online record would vary, based on the level of involvement the City would request of ICF. Should the applicant chose to pursue SB 7, ICF and the City would discuss the scope and budget at that time.

The below cost is provided for informational purposes as a rough estimate for this level of effort.

Cost: $15,000–$45,000
Schedule
Our preliminary Project schedule is included as Appendix E.

Cost Estimate
The cost estimate for the services described above is included as Appendix F to this proposal. The fee schedule included below provides hourly rates and classifications for all ICF personnel proposed for use on projects to be awarded under an as-needed contract for environmental (CEQA) services.

As outlined in Task 12 of our SOW, ICF will submit monthly invoices for the cost for services performed prior to the invoice date. Included will be a summary of each task, the name of the person doing the work, the hours spent by each person, and a brief description of the work.

Page G-8.48
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 29 Effective January 1, 2022
Labor Classification Per Hour
Senior Project Director $300
Project Director $270
Technical Director $235
Senior Technical Analyst $230
Managing Consultant $215
Senior Consultant III $190
Senior Consultant II $175
Senior Consultant I $160
Associate Consultant III $145
Associate Consultant II $135
Associate Consultant I $125
Assistant Consultant $115
Administrative Technician $80
Technician $75
Intern $65
Other Direct Expenses
Copy Center Services:
- Color printing (8.5 by 11 inches—11 by 17 inches)
- Black-and-white printing (8.5 by 11 inches—11 by 17 inches) $0.16 to $0.32/page
$0.08 to $0.16/page
Automobile mileage at current IRS rate $0.625/mile
Electronic field equipment $10.00/day
A general and administrative charge of 10% will be applied to all other direct costs, inclusive of subcontractor charges.

Per diem is charged at $175.00/day. A lodging surcharge will apply in high-rate areas.

Billing rates are subject to a 3% increase, effective January 1 of each year. *ICF Jones & Stokes, Inc.

Page G-8.49
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 30 Relevant Project Experience and References
Relevant Project Experience
ICF has almost a decade of experience from working on CEQA documents in Menlo Park.

Previously completed and ongoing projects in the city include the following:
§ Willow Village Project EIR
§ 1350 Adams Court Initial Study and EIR
§ Commonwealth Corporate Center Building 3 Initial Study and EIR § 1125 O’Brien Drive Initial Study and EIR
§ CSBio/1075 O’Brien Drive Initial Study and EIR
§ Facebook Campus Expansion Project EIR and EIR Addendums 1 & 2 § Commonwealth Corporate Center EIR
§ Middle Plaza Project at 500 El Camino Real
§ 1300 El Camino Real Project
§ Menlo Park Facebook Campus Project EIR Addendum
In addition to the projects listed above, ICF has extensive experience from preparing CEQA documents for similar jurisdictions throughout the San Francisco Peninsula and in the Bay Area.

Three recently completed EIRs, similar to the mixed-use development proposed under the Project, are the 751 Gateway Boulevard Project and Southline Specific Plan EIR (City of South San Francisco), Milpitas Metro Specific Plan EIR (City of Milpitas), and the Bayhill Specific Plan EIR (City of San Bruno). Descriptions and links to these EIRs are provided below. However, this is not an exhaustive list of projects completed by ICF on the Peninsula and in the Bay Area; additional project information is available upon request.

Southline Specific Plan EIR
ICF prepared the EIR for a new specific plan for a 26.5- acre industrial site within the City of South San
Francisco’s Lindenville Planning Sub-area, adjacent to
Tanforan Mall and the San Bruno BART station. The
proposed project, sponsored by Lane Partners, would
demolish all onsite uses within the specific plan area
and construct a transit-oriented R&D/office campus
with a maximum anticipated building area of
approximately 2.8 million square feet, including 3,064
underground parking spaces at various locations
throughout the specific plan area, a nine-story parking structure with approximately 2,705 spaces, a new east–west connection road (Southline Avenue, provisionally named for the purpose of the specific plan and CEQA review), supportive utilities and related infrastructure, and up to 341,800 square feet (approximately 7.8 acres) of open space.

Development would include commercial office/R&D buildings, envisioned to accommodate office and R&D tenants as well as supporting amenity uses, ranging in height from four to seven stories, subject to maximum building height limits in accordance with the Federal Aviation Administration and Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan requirements for San Francisco International Airport.

The proposed project would also construct offsite transportation, circulation, and infrastructure improvements at several locations outside the specific plan area, some of which are within the city of San Bruno (offsite improvement areas), totaling approximately 6.4 acres. As a responsible agency under CEQA, San Bruno was consulted during the EIR process to ensure that improvements within San Bruno’s jurisdiction were consistent with applicable local requirements.

Page G-8.50
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 31 Much like the Bayhill Specific Plan EIR, the Southline Specific Plan EIR included a programmatic analysis of the specific plan and a project-level analysis of the first phase of development under the specific plan. The City of South San Francisco intends to use the EIR as a streamlining document for future development applications under the plan. The final EIR was released in May 2022. The project was unanimously recommended for approval by the South San Francisco Planning Commission on June 2, 2022, and is pending consideration by the City Council.

The Draft and Final EIR for the Southline Specific Plan can be accessed here:
https://weblink.ssf.net/WebLink/Browse.aspx?startid=51192&row=1&dbid=0.

Milpitas Metro Specific Plan EIR
The Milpitas Metro Specific Plan (Metro Plan) planning
area covers a significant portion of the southern area
of Milpitas. The Metro Plan provides policies to guide
development in this district in terms of land use,
circulation, community design, and utilities and
services. Policy 7.5 of the original Transit Area Specific Plan (TASP) requires the creation of a coordinated
development plan for the parcels at and around the
Milpitas Transit Center; the Metro Plan will continue to fulfill that requirement. The Metro Plan expands the
original 437-acre TASP area by approximately 60
acres, annexing an industrial area on the east side near Interstate 680 and approximately 13 acres on the west side along a portion of South Main Street, resulting in a Metro Plan area of 510 acres.

Buildout associated with the Metro Plan (compared to the original TASP) would result in approximately 7,000 additional dwelling units, 3,000,000 additional square feet of office space (including industrial), 300,000 additional square feet of retail space, and 700 additional hotel rooms.

The vision of the Metro Plan is to transform the area into a transit-oriented neighborhood and complete the emerging neighborhood by expanding access to neighborhood services and retail, creating new opportunities for jobs near transit, providing additional affordable and market-rate housing, enhancing multimodal connections and non-vehicle mobility throughout the area, providing a greater variety of shared public spaces, and strengthening the identity sense of place within the Metro Plan area.

ICF prepared the draft subsequent EIR for the Metro Plan, which was released in April 2022. The document was prepared in accordance with the provisions of CEQA to evaluate the proposed changes to the Milpitas TASP final EIR, certified in 2008. The subsequent EIR analyzed the Metro Plan, an update to the original TASP. ICF is in the process of preparing the final subsequent EIR.

The draft subsequent EIR for the Milpitas Metro Specific Plan can be accessed here:
https://www.ci.milpitas.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Metro-Plan-Draft-SEIR_2022-April-withAppendix-A-F.pdf.

Page G-8.51
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 32 Bayhill Specific Plan EIR
ICF prepared the EIR for a new specific plan
for the 73-acre Bayhill Office Park, which is
San Bruno’s largest employment cluster,
employing about one-third of the 15,000
employees in the city, including YouTube,
Walmart.com, Kaiser Permanente, Oracle,
and others. The office park currently contains
about 1.5 million square feet of office space.

The project site, which abuts San Bruno’s
adopted Transit Corridors Specific Plan area,
also includes the adjacent 10-acre Bayhill Shopping Center. The specific plan would allow for the development of up to 2.46 million net new square feet of office uses on the project site. The specific plan would also establish housing and mixed-use overlay zones on a total of 20.5 acres in the southern portion of the project site that would allow for the development of up to 573 multi-family residential units. The project would accommodate the anticipated expansion of YouTube by adding additional office square footage while also creating a pedestrian-friendly and cohesive mixed-use community that enhances the area’s identity and image and provides greater linkages to nearby public transportation opportunities. The project was approved and the EIR was certified by unanimous vote by the San Bruno City Council in October 2021.

The Bayhill Specific Plan EIR included a programmatic analysis of specific plan buildout and a project-level analysis of the first phase of YouTube’s planned expansion (Phase I), which includes two new office buildings totaling 440,000 square feet. The specific plan allows mostly new office development but also establishes a residential overlay zone on the site. To allow for flexibility and account for variations in the mix of land uses that could ultimately be developed under the specific plan, the program analysis in the EIR evaluates “worst-case” buildout scenarios. The Phase I development is evaluated at a project level, relying on the plan analysis where possible and augmenting that analysis with site-specific and quantitative analysis where required. ICF worked closely with San Bruno’s planning consultant, along with technical consultants, including Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS), Bottomley Design & Planning, West Yost, and Woodard & Curran, among others, to develop the specific plan along with the EIR, ensuring both documents are integrated and consistent. Through this effort, ICF consulted on policy issues associated with the specific plan and developed a robust template and approach for the EIR’s program/project analysis.

The draft and final EIR for the Bayhill Specific Plan can be accessed here:
https://www.sanbruno.ca.gov/618/Bayhill-Specific-Plan.

Page G-8.52
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 33 References
Provided below are references regarding four recent projects of a similar size from public agencies for which ICF has provided environmental consulting services.

Reference #1
Project Southline Specific Plan EIR and 751 Gateway Boulevard Project EIR Client City of South San Francisco
Client Unit Economic and Community Development Department Client Contact Name and Title Adena Friedman, Senior Planner Client Contact Phone (650) 877-8535
Client Contact Email [email protected]
Client Address 315 Maple Street, South San Francisco, CA 94080 Reference #2
Project Milpitas Metro Specific Plan EIR
Client City of Milpitas
Client Unit Planning
Client Contact Name and Title Ned Thomas, AICP, Planning Director Client Contact Phone (408) 586-3273
Client Contact Email [email protected]
Client Address 455 East Calaveras Blvd., Milpitas CA 95035 Reference #3
Project Bayhill Specific Plan EIR
Client City of San Bruno
Client Unit Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division Client Contact Name and Title Matt Neuebaumer, Associate Planner Client Contact Phone (650) 616-7042
Client Contact Email [email protected]
Client Address 567 El Camino Real, San Bruno, CA 94066
Reference #4
Projects 220 Park Road IS/MND, 1766 El Camino Real IS/MND and Categorical Exemption, 1814–1820 Ogden Drive Initial Study
Client City of Burlingame
Client Unit Community Development Department – Planning Division Client Contact Name and Title Catherine Keylon, Senior Planner Client Contact Phone 650-558-7252
Client Contact Email [email protected]
Client Address 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA 94010
Page G-8.53
Parkline Project Environmental Consultant Services July 29, 2022 Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal. 34 Other Relevant Information/Disclosures
To the best of our knowledge and understanding, ICF Jones & Stokes, Inc., is not aware of findings against the firm and does not have judgments against it.

ICF maintains a robust insurance program, providing appropriate coverage limits for the professional services we provide and a company of our size. Some of the main coverages are outlined below:
(i) Commercial general liability and property (CHUBB), covering bodily injury and property damage, with minimum limits of one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence and two million dollars ($2,000,000) general aggregate, including premises liability, products/completed operations, and contractual liability coverage; (ii) Business automobile liability (CHUBB), covering owned, hired, and non-owned vehicles, with limits of at least one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single-limit (bodily injury and property damage);
(iii) Workers compensation (CHUBB), as required by all applicable statutory laws and employer’s liability coverage, with a limit of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000); (iv) Umbrella liability (CHUBB) coverage, with minimum limits of five million dollars ($5,000,000) each occurrence/aggregate, sitting excess of the general liability, business auto liability, and employer’s liability programs;
(v) Professional liability/cyber (CNA) coverage, with minimum limits of five million dollars ($5,000,000) per claim with respect to negligent acts, errors, or omissions in connection with services to be provided;
(vi) Cyber liability coverage with minimum limits of five million dollars ($5,000,000) per claim and sufficiently broad to respond to claims, including, but not limited to, infringement of copyright, trademark, trade dress, invasion of privacy violations, information theft, damage to or destruction of electronic information, release of private information, alteration of electronic information, extortion, and network security; (vii) Crime coverage (ZURICH), with limits not less than five million dollars ($5,000,000) per claim; and
(viii) Contractors pollution liability (IRONSHORE), with limits not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence.

Page G-8.54
Heidi Mekkelson
Managing Director/Principal
Ms. Mekkelson is a managing director/principal with ICF’s Environment and Planning Division. She has over 18 years of experience in the preparation and management of environmental analysis documentation pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

Ms. Mekkelson has worked on documents for large residential projects; mixed-use, urban infill developments; commercial/retail projects; major league sports/entertainment venues; adaptive reuse projects; transportation projects; and affordable housing. She has also prepared numerous programmatic analyses for general plans, specific plans, and habitat conservation plans. She is skilled at preparing CEQA streamlining documents and has conducted numerous trainings on the topic. Ms. Mekkelson focuses her work on the Bay Area and Southern California, and she has extensive experience managing private development projects in the cities of Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Project Experience
Southline Specific Plan EIR—City of South San Francisco Economic and Community Development Department, South San Francisco, California, 03/2020 – present
Project Manager. Ms. Mekkelson is serving as project manager to prepare an EIR for a new Specific Plan that would redevelop a 26.5- acre industrial site in the City of South San Francisco adjacent to the San Bruno Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) station with a transitoriented office/research and development (R&D) campus with a maximum anticipated building area of 2.8 million square feet. New development would include commercial buildings, a four-story supportive amenities building, approximately 3,000 underground parking spaces at various locations throughout the project site, a nine-story parking structure, a new east-west connection road (Southline Avenue), supportive utilities and related infrastructure, and approximately 300,000 square feet of open space. The City intends to use the EIR as a streamlining document for development applications under the Specific Plan.

Milpitas Metro Specific Plan—City of Milpitas, Milpitas, California
Project Director. Ms. Mekkelson is serving as the project director for the Milpitas Metro Specific Plan, and is currently working on the subsequent EIR, which updates the Specific Plan to allow for the development of additional growth around the recently completed Milpitas BART Station. Ms. Mekkelson has been working closely with the city and the authors of the Specific Plan to identify policies and mitigation measures to streamline future projects that will be developed in this area.
1766 El Camino Real Project Class 32 Infill Exemption—City of Burlingame Planning Division, Burlingame, California, 01/2022 – 06/2022
Project Director. Ms. Mekkelson served as project director for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption document for a project that would Years of Experience
Professional start date: 06/2003
ICF start date: 02/2016
Education
BS, Environmental Studies/
Biology, University of Southern
California, 2003
MSL, Water and Environmental
Law, University of the Pacific,
McGeorge School of Law,
expected completion 2024
Professional Affiliations
Association of Environmental
Professionals
San Francisco Planning and
Urban Research Association
Page G-8.55
demolish an existing two-story mixed-use building that is currently vacant, and construct a new eightstory, multiunit residential building with 311 residential units, 319 vehicle spaces, 172 bicycle parking spaces, and 14,132 sf of leasing and amenity space, as well as 25,892 sf of open space. ICF previously prepared an IS/MND for a different project at the same location, and to the extent possible, the analysis for this project relied on and/or updated the previous analysis that was included as part of the IS/MND where relevant to the currently proposed project.
751 Gateway Boulevard EIR—City of South San Francisco Economic and Community Development Department, South San Francisco, California, 11/2019 – 02/2021 Project Director. Ms. Mekkelson served as project director to prepare an EIR for the 751 Gateway Boulevard project in the City of South San Francisco. The project would involve the redevelopment of an approximately 7.4-acre, irregularly shaped site within the city’s Gateway Specific Plan planning area with a research and development (R&D) facility and office building. The project site is currently occupied by an existing 6-story, approximately 176,235-square foot (sf) office building at 701 Gateway Boulevard and a surface parking lot containing approximately 558 parking spaces. The proposed project would require entitlements to enable development of the project site, including, but not limited to, design review, precise plan approval, Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan approval, and a Conditional Use Permit required for a parking reduction.

Bayhill Specific Plan EIR and Streamlined CEQA Documents—City of San Bruno Planning Department, San Bruno, California, 07/2017 – present
Project Manager. Ms. Mekkelson served as project manager to prepare an EIR for a new Specific Plan for the 73-acre Bayhill Office Park, which is San Bruno’s largest employment cluster, employing about one-third of the 15,000 employees in the City, including You-Tube, Walmart.com, Kaiser Permanente, Oracle, and others. The office park currently contains about 1.5 million square feet of office space. The project site, which abuts the City’s adopted Transit Corridors Specific Plan area, also includes the adjacent 10-acre Bayhill Shopping Center. The Specific Plan would allow for the development of up to

2.46 million net new square feet of office uses on the Project Site. The Specific Plan would also establish housing and mixed-use overlay zones on a total of 20.5 acres in the southern portion of the Project Site that would allow for the development of up to 573 multi-family residential units. The project would accommodate the anticipated expansion of YouTube by adding additional office square footage while also creating a pedestrian-friendly and cohesive mixed-use community that enhances the area’s identity and image and provides greater linkages to nearby public transportation opportunities. The project was approved and the EIR was certified by unanimous vote by the San Bruno City Council in October 2021.

The EIR now serves as a streamlining document for development applications under the Specific Plan.

With the EIR complete, ICF provides assistance to the City in reviewing development applications for consistency with the Specific Plan, identifying the appropriate level of CEQA review, and preparing streamlined analyses.

Skyline College Residential Project Addendum— City of San Bruno Planning Department, San Bruno, California, 06/2017 – 03/2018
Project Manager. Ms. Mekkelson served as project manager for the preparation of an EIR Addendum for a 71-unit residential project on an 8-acre site adjacent to the San Mateo County Community College District’s (SMCCD) Skyline College Campus. The project was a component of the campus master plan for Skyline College and was analyzed in a 2016 Program EIR (also prepared by ICF) for SMCCD’s updated campus master plan for its three community college campuses. The Addendum examined the revised residential project in the context of the 2016 Program EIR focusing on changes to environmental impacts would result from the revisions to the project. ICF worked closely with SMCCD (the lead agency for the campus master plan) and the City of San Bruno (the lead agency for the residential project) to prepare the Addendum. The project was approved by the San Bruno City Council in 2018.

Page G-8.56
Jessica Viramontes
Senior Environmental Planner
Ms. Viramontes is a project manager with ICF’s environment and planning division. She has 16 years of experience in environmental planning and project management. She is skilled in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process and has worked with both municipal and private sector clients throughout the San Francisco Bay Area, including the San Francisco Planning Department, Oakland Planning and Building Department, and Contra Costa County Public Works Department. She has managed infill development projects and transportation projects of varying sizes. As a project manager, she serves as the day-to-day point of contact and ensures deliverables are on time, within budget, and meet or exceed scope requirements.

Project Experience
Middle Plaza at 500 El Camino Real Infill EIR—City of Menlo Park, California, 06/2016 – 12/2017
Project Manager for CEQA Review. Ms. Viramontes oversaw the preparation of the Infill Checklist and EIR as well as coordinating with the team and the City. Stanford University is proposing to redevelop six parcels of land along the east side of El Camino Real into a mixed-use development. The six new buildings at the project site would include approximately 305,000 square feet of residential space (215 housing units); 144,000 square feet of non-medical office space; and 10,000 square feet of ground floor retail/restaurant space. Major environmental issues include transportation, noise, and air quality.

Facebook Menlo Park Campus Expansion EIR and EIR
Addendum—City of Menlo Park, California, 05/2015 – 10/2017 Deputy Project Manager for the EIR and Project Manager for the EIR Addendum. Ms. Viramontes was on the management team for both the EIR and the EIR Addendum for the Facebook Campus Expansion Project, which includes the demolition of the existing buildings at the site and the construction of two new office buildings (Buildings 21 and 22), encompassing approximately 985,720 sf (a net increase of approximately 149,880 sf at the Project site). The project would be organized around a 5-acre publicly accessible green space and a bicycle/pedestrian corridor that would run through the middle of the site. The project would also include construction of a new bicycle/pedestrian bridge over Bayfront Expressway to allow for access to the Bay Trail and Bedwell Bayfront Park from the project site and the Belle Haven neighborhood. Major environmental issues include transportation and greenhouse gas emissions.
555 W. Middlefield Road & 777 W. Middlefield Road EIRs—City of Mountain View, California, 06/2017 – 05/2022
Project Manager. Ms. Viramontes served as the day-to-day contact for the City, overseeing the internal section authors, and coordinating with the subconsultants. The 555 W. Middlefield Project would retain the existing, 402 market rate apartment units and construct 341 new apartment units in site locations currently in use as landscape open area and surface parking lots for the existing complex. The project would be phased to maintain onsite parking as development occurs. The 777 W. Middlefield Project would demolish the entire, existing 208 market-rate apartment units and construct 711 new apartment units (including 144 affordable units). The environmental review for the 555 W. Middlefield Project was completed in 2022 and the environmental review for the 777 W. Middlefield Project was completed in 2019. Major environmental issues include transportation, noise, and air quality.

Years of Experience
Professional start date: 12/2006
ICF start date: 10/2014
Education
MS, Environmental Management,
University of San Francisco, 2011
BS, Environmental Management and
Protection, California Polytechnic
University San Luis Obispo, 2006
BA, English Literature, California
Polytechnic University San Luis
Obispo, 2006
Professional Memberships
Association of Environmental
Professionals (AEP)
Page G-8.57
The Village at San Antonio – Phase II Project, Addendum to the San Antonio Precise Plan EIR for Precise Plan Amendments—City of Mountain View, California, 12/2020 – Present Project Manager. Ms. Viramontes served as the day-to-day contact for the City, overseeing the internal section authors, and coordinating with the subconsultants. The Village at San Antonio – Phase II Project proposes the demolition of two single-story commercial buildings and associated surface parking, and the construction of a commercial building with public open spaces and below-grade parking garage. The project would construct a seven-story building with ground-floor retail and six levels of office uses above, along with three levels of subterranean parking that would connect to the adjacent underground parking.

Major environmental issues include transportation, noise, and air quality.

San Francisco Housing Element 2022 Update Environmental Impact Report (EIR)—San Francisco Planning Department, San Francisco, CA, 07/2020 – Present Project Manager. Ms. Viramontes currently serves as project manager for the San Francisco Housing Element Update 2022 EIR. The EIR will provide a programmatic analysis of the indirect impacts that could result from adoption and implementation of the San Francisco Housing Element 2022 Update, which revises the adopted 2014 Housing Element of the General Plan. The proposed action is evaluating the objective of producing an average of approximately 5,000 housing units per year between 2020 and 2050. Major environmental issues include transportation, cultural resources, air quality, noise, aesthetics, and population and housing.

Station East Mixed Use Project EIR – Integral, Union City, California, 06/2019 – 01/2022 Project Manager for CEQA Review. Ms. Viramontes served as the day-to-day contact for the City and oversaw the preparation of the EIR. The project proposes the demolition of the buildings and surface parking lots and development of up to approximately 1.8 million sf, including up to 974 new residential units (apartments, condominiums, and townhome-style condominiums, referred to in this report as townhomes) and approximately 30,800 sf of commercial space. Three community parks, one tot lot, and one outdoor amphitheater would be located throughout the project site. The project site is part of the Decoto Industrial Park Study Area (DIPSA) Specific Plan area. Major environmental issues include transportation and hazardous materials.

Mission Bay School EIR—San Francisco Unified School District, 03/2020-06/2022 Project Manager. Ms. Viramontes served as project manager to prepare a focused EIR and initial study for the construction of a multi-story, up to 105,700-square-foot school, which would include a preschool, transitional kindergarten, kindergarten-through-fifth grade elementary school, linked learning hub, professional learning space, outdoor learning area, outdoor play area, and paved surface parking lot. Ms.

Viramontes was responsible for QA/QC and coordination with ICF’s internal technical specialist team. 751 Gateway EIR—City of South San Francisco, California, 11/2019 – 01/2021 Project Manager. Ms. Viramontes served as the day-to-day contact for the City, overseeing the internal section authors, and coordinating with the subconsultants. The proposed building would be constructed on the site of an existing surface parking lot. The proposed project involves the construction of a 148-foottall, seven-story building with approximately 208,800 sf of usable space (60 percent R&D uses, and 40 percent office uses). The existing building at 701 Gateway Boulevard would remain. Major environmental issues include transportation (vehicle miles traveled) and air quality. 3700 California Street Project EIR—TMG Partners, San Francisco, CA, 03/2018 – 04/2020 Deputy Project Manager. Ms. Viramontes was part of the project management team and was responsible for QA/QC and coordination with ICF’s internal technical specialist team for an EIR related to a redevelopment project on the current site of the California Pacific Medical Center (CPMC). The project proposes the demolition of five existing hospital buildings on the project site, the renovation and adaptive reuse of two existing buildings, and the construction of 31 new residential buildings (273 dwelling units) and accessory amenity spaces. The proposed project would be constructed on three blocks, with residential buildings ranging from three to seven stories and situated above below-grade parking podiums on each block.

Page G-8.58
Kirsten Chapman, BA
Ms. Chapman has over 15 years of experience in project
management/coordination and environmental planning. She is skilled in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)/National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process and has worked with municipal and federal clients, particularly in the San Francisco Bay Area. Ms. Chapman has focused on large, mixed-use infill development projects, tech campuses, office developments, and housing projects. She is responsible for writing sections for CEQA documents such as initial studies (ISs), mitigated negative declarations (MNDs), draft environmental impact reports (EIRs), final EIRs, and statements of overriding considerations. Ms. Chapman leads multidisciplinary teams through project management and conducts environmental analysis, prepares technical reports, performs quality control (QC)/quality assurance (QA), and edits documents for production. Project management responsibilities include client and internal team coordination, development of the scope of work and budget, project initiation tasks, subconsultant communication, preparation of progress reports, and
contracting/billing. She has helped manage key projects such as the Willow Village Master Plan EIR, the Facebook Campus Expansion EIR, the City Place Santa Clara EIR, the Seawall Lot 337/Pier 48 (Mission Rock) Mixed-Use EIR, and the Burlingame Point EIR.

Project Experience
Willow Village Master Plan EIR—City of Menlo Park, CA, 01/2018 – Present
Senior Advisor/Former Project Manager. Ms. Chapman conducts project management tasks such as coordinating with the client and subconsultants, tracking billing and invoices, overseeing staff, reviewing and producing documents, and leading meetings and conference calls. The project sponsor, on behalf of Meta/Facebook, Inc., is proposing to redevelop an existing, approximately 59-acre industrial site as a multiphase, mixed-use development. The Willow Village Master Plan project would demolish existing onsite buildings and construct new buildings within a residential/shopping district, town square district, and campus district. The project would increase the area for nonresidential uses (i.e., office space and nonoffice commercial/retail) by approximately 1 million square feet (sq. ft.), for a total of approximately 2 million sq. ft. of nonresidential uses. The proposed project would also include multifamily housing units, a hotel, indoor space dedicated for community facilities/uses, park buildings/improvements, open space, and a bicycle/pedestrian tunnel.
1350 Adams Court-Lot 3 Project EIR—City of Menlo Park
Senior Advisor/Former Project Manager. Overseeing the
preparation of the Initial Study and EIR, which tiers off of the Menlo Park General Plan EIR (ConnectMenlo). Writing section, conducting senior review, and coordinating subconsultants. The Project Sponsor is proposing to construct an approximately 260,400 gross-squarefoot (gsf) building for life science (research and development) uses.

Parking for the new building would be provided in both podium-level and above-grade garages that would be integrated into the building.

Years of Experience
Professional start date: 02/2007
ICF start date: 01/2013
Education
BA, Environmental
Studies/Economics, University
of California, Santa Cruz, 2007
BA, Politics, with honors,
University of California, Santa
Cruz, 2007
Page G-8.59
The Initial Study and EIR discloses relevant impacts and mitigation measures covered in the ConnectMenlo EIR and discusses whether the Project is within the parameters of the ConnectMenlo EIR.

Commonwealth Building 3 Project EIR—City of Menlo Park
Senior Advisor/Former Project Manager. Overseeing the preparation of the Initial Study and EIR, which tiers off of the Menlo Park General Plan EIR (ConnectMenlo). Writing section, conducting senior review, and coordinating subconsultants. The Sobrato Organization (Project Sponsor) is proposing to construct an approximately 249,500-gross-square-foot (gsf) office building and an approximately 349,100 gsf parking structure as part of the Commonwealth: Building 3 Project (Project). The Project site is the existing Commonwealth Corporate Center property, which includes the Commonwealth Site at 162 and 164 Jefferson Drive and the Jefferson Site (also at 164 Jefferson Drive). Two buildings (Buildings 1 and 2), currently occupied by Facebook, were constructed at the Project site as part of the Commonwealth Corporate Center Project. The Project would add a four-story office building (Building 3) and a five-story parking structure with 1,061 parking spaces to the Project site.

Facebook Campus Expansion Project EIR—City of Menlo Park Served as Project Manager. Conducted project management tasks such as coordination with the client and subconsultants, tracked billing and invoices, oversaw staff, reviewed and produced the documents, and lead meetings and conference calls. The proposed Facebook Campus Expansion Project included the demolition of the existing buildings at the site and the construction of two new office buildings (Buildings 21 and 22), encompassing approximately 985,720 sf (a net increase of approximately 149,880 sf at the Project site). The Project would be organized around a 5-acre publicly accessible green space and a bicycle/pedestrian corridor that would run through the middle of the site. The Project would also include construction of a new bicycle/pedestrian bridge over Bayfront Expressway to allow for access to the Bay Trail and Bedwell Bayfront Park from the Project site and the Belle Haven neighborhood. 1300 El Camino Real Project Infill Checklist and Infill EIR—City of Menlo Park Served as Deputy Project Manager. The Project’s development parameters are consistent with the development anticipated by the El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan. Therefore, CEQA analysis for this Project demonstrates consistency with SB 226, CEQA Streamlining for Infill Projects. Kirsten led the ICF team in preparing an Infill Environmental Checklist, followed by a focused Infill EIR. The Project would demolish the existing structures and construct approximately 420,000 sf of mixed uses. In total, the Project would include three mixed-use buildings up to four stories in height, a surface parking lot, an underground parking garage, onsite linkages, landscaping, and a privately-owned, publicly accessible park. The uses at the Project site would include a range of approximately: 200,000 sf of non-medical office space in two buildings; 200,000 sf of residential space (up to 202 housing units) in one building; and 30,000 sf of community-serving space.

SRI International Campus Modernization Project EIR—City of Menlo Park Served as Deputy Project Manager. Conducted project management tasks such as progress reports, scope/budget development, contract preparation and tracking, client and internal coordination, and working with subconsultants. SRI International is proposing to modernize its Campus with phased development over the next 25 years, amend the existing employee cap, and modify other land use regulations governing the site.

Commonwealth Corporate Center Project EIR—City of Menlo Park Served as Deputy Project Manager. Conducted project management tasks such as progress reports, scope/budget development, contract preparation and tracking, client and internal coordination, and working with subconsultants. The project, which requires an EIR, involves two four-story office buildings totaling 237,000 sf of office, biotech, and R&D uses.

Page G-8.60
Devan Atteberry, BS
Senior Environmental Planner
Devan Atteberry is an environmental planner and graduate from California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo with a B.S. in Environmental Management and Protection, and a minor in Biology. She has four years of experience and knowledge conducting environmental analyses in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). She has also worked on sections for various forms of environmental documentation, including environmental impact reports (EIRs), environmental impact statements (EISs), initial studies and mitigated negative declarations (IS/MNDs), categorical exemptions (CEs), as well as addendums and community plan exemptions (CPEs). Devan has worked on a wide range of projects, including development, transportation, and habitat conservation plans. She focuses her work on the Bay Area and has extensive experience working on projects within the City of Menlo Park, and surrounding municipalities.

Project Experience
Lot 3 North: 1350 Adams Court Project IS/MND and EIR—City of Menlo Park, Menlo Park, CA, 08/2018-Ongoing
Project Manager and Section Author. Serving as project manager, as of 01/2022, and section author for a project that would redevelop a portion of the existing Menlo Park Labs Campus. The project site currently consists of both an undeveloped vacant area on the northern portion at 1350 Adams Court (referred to as Lot 3 North) and an existing building on the southern portion at 1305 O’Brien Drive. The project would construct an approximately 255,000 gsf, five-story life sciences building on Lot 3 North with parking. The existing building at 1305 O’Brien Drive, and the campus property outside of the project site would remain in its existing condition. ICF prepared an Initial Study and a focused draft EIR. Devan drafted the energy, waterline analysis, other CEQA, and alternatives sections of the draft EIR, and is currently working on the final EIR.

Commonwealth: Building 3 Project IS/MND—City of Menlo Park, Menlo Park, California, 10/2018- Ongoing
Deputy Project Manager and Section Author. The project
proposes to construct an approximately 249,500-gross-square-foot (gsf) office building and an approximately 404,000 gsf parking structure. The project would add a four-story office building, and a five-story parking structure with 1,340 parking spaces. Devan authored several sections of the initial study, as well as the Draft EIR, including the executive summary, project description, and other CEQA sections.

Southline Specific Plan EIR—City of South San Francisco, South San Francisco, California, 03/2020- ongoing
Deputy Project Manager and Section Author. Serving as deputy project manager and section author to prepare an EIR for a new Specific Plan for the 26-acre Southline Specific Plan Area. The proposed project would demolish all existing industrial uses on-site and construct seven office buildings, an amenities building, Years of Experience
Professional start date: 08/2018
ICF start date: 08/2018
Education
BS, Environmental Management
and Protection, California
Polytechnic State University, San
Luis Obispo, 2018
Professional Affiliations
Association of Environmental
Professionals (AEP), Member,
2018-Present
Page G-8.61
underground parking throughout the site, a parking structure, a new road connection, and approximately 369,000-square feet of open space. Development of the proposed project would be phased, including a Phase I. In total, the project is anticipated to have a maximum building area of 2.8 million-square feet.

Devan drafted the energy, wildfire, public services, and alternatives sections, and is currently working on the final EIR.

City of San Bruno Environmental Impact Report for the Bayhill Specific Plan—City of San Bruno, CA, 2017 – 2021
Deputy Project Manager/Section Author. Served as Deputy Project Manager for the environmental assessment of the Bayhill Specific Plan for the City of San Bruno. The Project included the Bayhill Specific Plan, a regulatory document for the 92.2-acre Project Site, and the construction of 440,000 square feet of new office space for YouTube's corporate office (Phase I Development). The Specific Plan will facilitate integrated development within the Project Site, including the Phase I Development, and allow for commercial/retail, office, residential, hotel, civic, and open space uses. The Specific Plan also established a housing and mixed-use overlay zones on a total of 20.5 acres in the southern portion of the Project Site that would allow for the development of up to 573 multi-family residential units. Devan drafted the energy section of the EIR, as well as edited and revised other sections of the EIR.

Station East Residential/Mixed Use Project EIR—City of Union City, Union City, CA, 01/2019- 04/2021
Project Coordinator and Section Author. Served as project coordinator and section author for the EIR for the Station East Residential/Mixed Use Project in the City of Union City. The project is an infill project involving the redevelopment of approximately 24-acres of existing industrial and agricultural uses. The project proposes to demolish the existing buildings and develop approximately 45,000 – square feet of commercial space, up to 1,150 new residential apartments, parking structures, and two linear parks.

Devan drafted the project description, population and housing, public services, and recreation sections.

San Francisco Housing Element 2022 Update EIR—City of San Francisco Planning Department, San Francisco, CA, 02/2021- Present
Section Author. The proposed project would update the 2014 housing element of the San Francisco General Plan, and establish goals, policies, and actions to address the existing and projected housing needs of the city of San Francisco. The overarching goal of the housing element update is to add 150,000 housing units between 2020 and 2050, or approximately 5,000 new housing units per year, with at least one-third of the housing units being permanently allocated for low- and moderate-income families. Devan drafted the land use, energy, and shadow sections of the Draft EIR. 1489 West Sunset Boulevard Project—City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, 09/2020- Ongoing
Project Manager and Section Author. Serving as project manager and section author for the preparation of a CE for the demolition of a parking lot and two commercial buildings, retaining two buildings, and constructing a residential and commercial mixed-use building with two subterranean parking levels, and five above-ground residential levels. The project would include a mixed-use building with 136 residential units, 8,000 square feet of restaurant space, 985 square feet of outdoor eating areas, a 930 square foot lobby and mailroom, and 2,050 square feet of residential amenity space. Devan is managing the scope, schedule, and budget, and has drafted the project description and multiple sections within the CE document.
555 West Middlefield EIR—City of Mountain View, Mountain View, CA, 10/2018- 10/2021 Deputy Project Manager and Section Author. Served as deputy project manager and section author for the 555 West Middlefield Project in the City of Mountain View. The proposed project is an infill project involving the demolition of most of the existing surface parking areas and redevelopment of approximately

14.5-acres. The project is proposing a General Plan Amendment and Rezoning to allow the retention of 402 existing residential units, and the development of up to 334 new multi-family residential units in two buildings, as well as three subterranean garages. Devan drafted the energy, land use, and population and housing sections, along with the response to comments on the Final EIR.

Page G-8.62
Laura Yoon, MS
Managing Director
Ms. Yoon is an air quality and climate change managing director with experience in preparing criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas (GHG) inventories for both public and private sector projects. She focuses on technical modeling and report preparation in support of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and recent GHG legislation. Laura’s expertise includes air quality impact studies; conformity analyses; dispersion modeling and health risk assessments; GHG inventories; and climate action plan (CAP) development. She has served as the technical lead and project manager for numerous air quality and climate change analyses throughout California. Prior project work provides a solid background for understanding and evaluating air quality, climate change, and energy impacts from projects.

Project Experience
Bayhill Specific Plan EIR—City of San Bruno, San Bruno, CA, 05/2018 – 12/2021
Air Quality and Climate Change Specialist. Laura oversaw the air quality and climate change chapters for the EIR. The Bayhill Specific Plan will outline a cohesive, long-term, community driven vision for this key district, that is home to the largest cluster of offices in San Bruno, including headquarters of YouTube, as well as several other uses. Construction and operational emissions were quantified using CalEEMod, EMFAC, the EPA’s AP 4.2, and other accepted tools. A detailed health risk assessment was also prepared to analyze potential receptor exposure to diesel emissions generated during construction of the new YouTube headquarters.

Belmont General Plan and Specific Plan EIR—City of Belmont, CA, 01/2017 – 04/2019
Air Quality and Climate Change Specialist. Laura prepared the air quality and climate change changes for the City of Belmont’s 2035 General Plan Update and Belmont Village Specific Plan.

Construction emissions from buildout of both the General Plan and Specific Plan were estimated using CalEEMod. Air quality and GHG impacts from motor vehicles operating within the General Plan and Specific Plan areas were evaluated using the CT-EMFAC2014 model whereas area and energy emissions were estimated using
CalEEMod. Carbon monoxide hot-spots from increased traffic were modeled using the CALINE4 dispersion model. The analysis also evaluated health risks from receptor exposure to asbestos containing material and particulate matter. GHG emissions from buildout of the General Plan were evaluated by examining consistency of the plan, which includes the CAP, with the recommendations of the California Air Resources Board for municipalities to support Assembly Bill 32, Senate Bill 32, and Executive Order S-3-05 reduction targets.

City Place Santa Clara EIR—RELATESC, Santa Clara, CA,
03/2013 – 04/2017
Air quality and climate change specialist. The project is a 240 acre multiphased, mixed-use City neighborhood including up to 9.16 million gross square feet of office buildings, retail and entertainment Years of Experience
Professional start date: 06/2009
ICF start date: 06/2009
Education
MS, Environmental Management,
University of San Francisco, 2013
BA (summa cum laude),
Environmental Studies (minor in
Resource Management),
University of Washington, 2009
Certifications/Registrations
None.

Professional Affiliations
Association of Environmental
Professionals (2010 – Present)
Association of Women in Water,
Energy, and Environment (2020 –
2021)
Page G-8.63
facilities, residential units, and hotel rooms, and would also include surface and structured parking facilities. Laura helped prepare the health risk assessment for the project and conducted emissions modeling. She evaluated air quality impacts using CalEEMod, EMFAC, marine emission factors from the California Air Resources Board, the EPA’s AP 4.2, and other resources. She prepared a detailed health risk assessment using AERMOD and HARP.

San Francisco Giants Mission Rock Seawall Lot 337 Pier 48 EIR—Seawall Lot 37 Associates LLC, San Francisco, CA, 6/2013 – 2/2016
Air quality and climate change specialist. Laura served as technical analyst for CEQA review, conducting the air quality analysis, HRA, and climate change analysis. Seawall Lot 337, LLC proposes a mixed-use, multiphase waterfront development of Seawall Lot 337, rehabilitation/reuse of Pier 48, and construction of associated open spaces, public access areas, assembly areas, and an internal grid of new streets and utilities. In total, the project would include approximately 3.6 million gross square feet of flexible development including residential, commercial, and retail uses. ICF led a multidisciplinary team to evaluate the changes to the project site. Air quality impacts were evaluated using CalEEMod, EMFAC, marine emission factors from the California Air Resources Board, the EPA’s AP 4.2, and other resources.

A detailed health risk assessment was prepared using AERMOD and HARP.

Folsom Center for Health Master Plan—UC Davis Health, Sacramento, California, 5/2021 – ongoing
Air Quality and Climate Change Specialist. Through the Master Services Agreement with UC Davis Health, Laura is leading the air quality and GHG analyst for this program and project-level EIR. The project includes include a 110,000-sf medical office building, a 114,000-sf ambulatory surgery center, an 80,000-sf hotel, an 86,000-sf micro-hospital, a Central Utility Plant (CUP), and approximately 1,357 parking stalls. Laura is quantifying construction and operational emissions using CalEEMod and other accepted models. Heath risks to existing and planned future development are being analyzed using AERMOD. The EIR will evaluate project consistency with the City of Folsom’s CAP, UC Davis’ Sustainability Policy and Carbon Neutrality Initiative, and State climate change goals.

Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures and California Emissions Estimator Model—Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, California, 2020 – 2022 Project manager. Laura lead a team of ICF subject matter experts and three subconsultants to incorporate climate adaptation and environmental justice into the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures handbook and to expand the GHG reduction measures to reflect the latest methodologies and best practices. Concurrently, ICF transformed CalEEMod into a web-based platform that integrated the updated Handbook to help mainstream climate adaptation and public health planning into project-level analysis.

Awards for Managed Projects
Climate Change Business Journal Achievement Award (2021). Advancing Best Practices Award for Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity: Designed for Local Governments, Communities, and Project Developers (“Handbook”). Laura severed as the project manager and lead analyst for the project.

American Planning Association, Sacramento Valley Section (2022). Award of Merit – Best Practices for the “Handbook”.

American Planning Association (2015). Award of Merit – Comprehensive Plan, Large Jurisdiction, for the Los Angeles County General Plan Update. Laura severed as the project manager and lead analyst for the Climate Action Plan, which was part of the General Plan Update.

Page G-8.64
Cory Matsui, BA
Manager—Air Quality and Climate Change
Mr. Matsui is a manager and senior air quality, climate change, and noise specialist, with experience in environmental impact analysis in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. In his 11 years of experience in the field of environmental science, Mr. Matsui has analyzed a diverse suite of projects, including rail and roadway projects, mixed-use development projects, and infrastructure projects. He is a talented writer and excels at drafting compelling narratives. His skill set also includes emissions modeling, quantitative Excel-based assessments, report preparation, and noise monitoring surveys. Mr. Matsui’s expertise includes point-, area-, and mobile-source air quality impact studies; greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions inventory and reduction plan development; air quality conformity analyses; and air quality dispersion modeling. He has experience with standard air quality modeling software including EMFAC, AERMOD, CALRoads, and CALEEMOD, and with the
Federal Highway Administration’s Roadway Construction Noise Model and Traffic Noise Model, and standard noise protocols.

Project Experience
City of San Francisco Housing Element Update—San Francisco, CA, 03/2020 – Present
Lead Analyst. Mr. Matsui serves as lead analyst for the analysis of environmental impacts in the air quality and GHG resource areas resulting from the update of the city’s Housing Element. He has used complex air quality modeling results and distilled them into a streamlined narrative, presenting the impacts of the Housing Element update in a reader-friendly and conclusive manner.

Updates to the Quantifying GHG Mitigation Measures—
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, Sacramento, CA, 08/2020 – Present
Emissions Reduction Analyst. Mr. Matsui serves as lead analyst in the effort to update the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association’s (CAPCOA’s) Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures handbook and expand the GHG reduction measures to reflect latest methodologies and best practices. He leads and guides other analysts to perform a technically sound update of one of the most respected GHG reduction measure guidance documents.

Facebook Constitution Campus Expansion EIR and Addendum, Menlo Park, California
Mr. Matsui served as a technical expert for the air quality and noise analyses for the Facebook Constitution Campus Expansion Project Environmental Impact Report and EIR addendum. He conducted long-term and short-term noise measurements at the existing campus facility to evaluate the ambient noise levels, and quantified construction- and operational-related criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions and evaluated the project’s impact with respect to the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s guidelines.

Years of Experience
Professional start date: 01/2011
ICF start date: 01/2011
Education
BA, Atmospheric Science,
University of California Berkeley,
2009
Page G-8.65
One Vassar Project Community Plan Exemption, San Francisco, CA, 02/2019 – 02/2020 Lead Analyst and Senior Reviewer. Mr. Matsui served as lead analyst and author of the noise technical report and as senior reviewer of the air quality technical report for a mixed-used office building. He led a noise monitoring survey and conducted a comprehensive noise analysis of the project. He also performed quality assurance (QA) and thoroughly reviewed the air quality technical report. Because of Mr. Matsui’s contributions, the project was able to successfully document consistency with the Central SoMa Plan. 3700 California Street—TMG Partners, San Francisco, CA, 07/2018 – 02/2020 Lead Analyst. Mr. Matsui served as lead author and technical specialist of the noise analysis for an environmental impact report (EIR) for a large, multiblock housing development project in San Francisco.

He conducted noise measurements at the project site to determine existing noise levels and assessed construction and operational noise and vibration impacts of the project in accordance with the City of San Francisco’s noise guidelines.

Santa Clara Building V5 Data Center Project & Santa Clara Building V6 Data Center Project – Santa Clara, California
Conducted air quality and greenhouse gas analyses for two data center projects in the City of Santa Clara. Evaluated the impacts of construction and operational criteria pollutant emissions, including the impacts from a large number of back-up diesel generators at each project site. Additionally, Cory successfully assessed the significance of the projects’ impacts on greenhouse gases, taking into consideration the substantial energy consumption typically associated with data centers.

Sonoma County Climate Action 2020—Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Agency, County of Sonoma, CA, 04/2013 – 07/2016
Lead Technical Analyst. Mr. Matsui served as lead analyst in the development of a GHG emissions inventory—backcast and forecast—prepared for the Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Agency, for nine jurisdictions in the county. He was one of the primary analysts to quantify GHG emissions for all standard sectors (i.e., building energy, water, waste, etc.) in accordance with the Local Governments for Sustainability’s (ICLEI’s) Community Greenhouse Gas guidelines. Mr. Matsui developed and quantified GHG reduction measures for GHG reduction potential to help the county achieve its GHG reduction goal. He constructed a GHG reduction planning tool for municipal jurisdictions to assess GHG reductions associated with each reduction measure, based on user-inputted commitment levels. Results of the GHG inventory and reduction analyses were incorporated into a comprehensive climate action plan document, for which Mr. Matsui served as a primary author.

Station East Residential/Mixed-Use Project – City of Union City, CA Mr. Matsui was the senior air quality and greenhouse gas reviewer and lead noise analyst for a large mixed-used development project in Union City. Cory provided expert air quality oversight on the air quality analysis and comprehensively addressed comments from the public. He also led a noise monitoring survey and thoroughly evaluated noise impacts from project construction and operations. The project is a residential and commercial development in Union City, in close proximity to the BART station, and would provide much-needed housing units in a transit rich area. 220 Park Road Development Initial Study – City of Burlingame, California Cory was the lead air quality analyst for an office and retail development in the former post-office building in downtown Burlingame. Cory efficiently modelled the project’s construction and operational emissions in accordance with Bay Area Air Quality Management District guidelines, and quantified the health risks for people living near the project site.

Page G-8.66
Lisa Webber, MS
Botanist/Wetland Ecologist
Lisa Webber specializes in coordinating and conducting botanical field surveys and wetland delineations of study areas in vegetation communities throughout northern California. She prepares California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation, including environmental impacts reports (EIRs), wetland delineations, and various forms of environmental documentation for a wide variety of projects, including specific plans and master plans for development and redevelopment.

Lisa also prepares application packages and coordinates with agency staff for Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 permits, California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) streambed alteration agreements, and Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 10a requirements.

Project Experience
San Francisco Housing Element 2022 Update EIR—San
Francisco Planning Department, San Francisco, CA, 01/2022 – Present
Biologist. Lisa assisted with preparation of the biological resources section of the administrative draft EIR for the proposed update of the adopted 2014 housing element of the San Francisco General Plan.

She provided peer review and guidance for the special-status plants and aquatic resources impact analyses.

San Rafael Transit Center Replacement Project—Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District, San Rafael, CA, 07/2020 – Present
Biologist. Lisa performed field studies, including botanical surveys, evaluation of vegetation communities, and an assessment of aquatic resources in an urban area (downtown San Rafael) proposed for relocation of a transit center. She prepared the botanical and aquatic resources sections of the project EIR.

Geary Road Bridge Replacement Project IS/MND—San
Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC), Alameda
County, CA, 01/2010 – 07/2012
Biologist. Lisa conducted botanical surveys and the delineation of waters of the US. She prepared the botanical survey technical report, wetland delineation report, and IS/MND for a proposed bridge replacement over Alameda Creek in the Sunol Regional Wilderness Park.

Housing-Related Code Amendments DEIR—County of Placer,
California, 04/2020 – 10/2020
Biologist. Lisa prepared the vegetation and aquatic resource sections of the draft EIR for proposed amendments to the Placer County General Plan, Placer County Zoning Ordinance, Zoning Combining Districts, and Community Design Manual for Multi-Family and Mixed-Use Development, which would provide a framework for Years of Experience
Professional start date: 10/1990
ICF start date: 05/1998
Education
MS, Botany, University of
Massachusetts, Amherst, 1987
BA, Biology, University of
California, Santa Cruz, 1980
Professional Affiliations
California Native Plant Society
Page G-8.67
future housing development in the parts of Placer County that are under County jurisdiction.

Central El Dorado Hills Specific Plan EIR—El Dorado County, CA, 2012 – Present Biologist. Prepared the vegetation and wetland EIR sections for a 340-acre regional community plan in the El Dorado Hills Community Region. Background technical reports including vegetation mapping, special-status plant surveys, and a delineation of waters of the U.S. were incorporated into the biological resources chapter of the EIR. A reconnaissance survey of the site was conducted to review and verify the data provided. Sensitive resource issues included oak woodlands, riparian habitat, and waters of the U.S.

Village of Marble Valley Specific Plan EIR—El Dorado County, CA, 2012 – Present Biologist. Lisa prepared the vegetation and wetland sections for the draft EIR for a proposed regional community plan located on 1,875 acres south of SR 50 in El Dorado Hills. Background technical reports, including vegetation mapping, special-status plant surveys, and a delineation of waters of the U.S. were provided and incorporated into the biological resources chapter of the EIR. A reconnaissance survey of the site was conducted to review and verify the data provided. Sensitive resource issues included oak woodlands, riparian habitat, waters of the U.S., and a special-status plant species.

Lime Rock Valley Specific Plan EIR—El Dorado County, California, 2012 – Present Biologist. Lisa prepared the vegetation and wetland sections for the draft EIR for a proposed regional community plan located on 740 acres south of SR 50 in El Dorado Hills. Background technical reports, including vegetation mapping, special-status plant surveys, and a delineation of waters of the U.S. were provided and incorporated into the biological resources chapter of the EIR. A reconnaissance survey of the site was conducted to review and verify the data provided. Sensitive resource issues included oak woodlands, riparian habitat, waters of the U.S., and two special-status plant species.

U.C. Davis Sacramento Campus Long-Range Development Plan, Hospital Tower, and Aggie Square Projects EIRs—City of Sacramento, California, 02/2020 – 04/2022 Biologist. Lisa conducted botanical surveys and an assessment for aquatic resources in the UCD Health LRDP area, which included two specific project areas. She prepared the botanical and wetland sections of the programmatic EIR for the plan and the project-level EIRs for the Hospital Tower and Aggie Square projects.

West Sacramento General Plan Update EIR and Liberty Island Specific Plan EIR—City of West Sacramento, CA, 8/2015 – 9/2106
Biologist. Lisa reviewed information from the General Plan Public Review Draft Background Report, Liberty Island Specific Plan, the CNDDB, CNPS Inventory, and USFWS species lists. She conducted program-level and project-level analyses and prepared the vegetation and wetland portions of the General Plan Update EIR and Specific Plan EIR.

University District Specific Plan EIR—City of Rohnert Park, CA, 01/2004 – 11/2005 Biologist. Lisa prepared the botanical and wetland portions of an EIR for a commercial center, affordable housing at a variety of densities, including for-sale affordable housing, parks, open space preserves, trails, school, and a variety of housing types. The EIR will serve as a program-level EIR for the entire specific plan area and as a project-level EIR for a portion of the specific plan area. Major issues included wetlands and endangered species. The EIR was certified in May 2006.

River Park Project EIR—City of West Sacramento, California, 01/2005 – 2006 Biologist. Lisa prepared the botanical and wetland portions of a draft EIR. This project will include approximately 2,788 residential units (including rural residential and low-, medium-, and high-density offerings), a 44-acre regional park, community open space areas, a school, new roads, and a marina. Key biological resource issues include loss of habitat and realignment of an existing agricultural irrigation ditch at the site, which would be expanded and redesigned as an open water/emergent marsh habitat amenity along the Sacramento River.

Page G-8.68
Lora Holland, MA, RPA
Senior Archaeologist
Lora is a Registered Professional Archaeologist RPA#989173 and is a qualified professional archaeologist (36 CFR 61) with over 19 years of archaeological field and management experience on various project sites, both terrestrial and maritime. Lora has 12 years of cultural resources management experience on projects throughout California and served as a principal investigator, project manager, authored and overseen the drafting of cultural resources studies for local, state, and federal agencies in compliance with CEQA and Section 106. Lora’s experience and expertise include survey testing and data recovery; monitoring; contractor training; archival research; artifact analysis and conservation; field staff supervision; cultural resources identification and eligibility evaluations, impact assessments, and mitigations; assisting agencies with Native American outreach and consultation; Section 106 studies for Caltrans, California High Speed Rail Authority, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, and the Federal Aviation
Administration.

Project Experience
Bay Area Ridge Trail: Fremont to Garin Project- East Bay Regional Parks District (EBRPD) Fremont and Union City, Alameda County, California, 2017 – 2018
Principal Investigator/Cultural Resources Task Lead (work conducted prior to employment with ICF).

Lora conducted the cultural resources study and authored the report in support of proposed construction of approximately 2.2 miles of new nonmotorized multiuse recreational trail. The study consisted of background research, including a records search and a literature review of the proposed Area of Potential Effects (APE); a pedestrian field survey; and a Sacred Lands File search request with the Native American Heritage Commission. These tasks identified CA-ALA548H/P-01-000227, an archaeological site with precontact and historic-period components, including the exposed foundations of an 1856 mill. Human remains were also identified during the survey.

Lora worked with the EBRPD and the Native American Most Likely Descendant to design the trail access to avoid impacts to this resource. The project required an Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) Section 404 Nationwide Permit; due to this, the study complied with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (Section 106) and supported the project’s obligations under CEQA.

California High-Speed Rail Project, Bakersfield to Palmdale Project Section- California High Speed Rail Authority, Kern and Los Angeles, Counties, 2015 – 2020
Co-Principal Investigator (work conducted prior to employment with ICF). Lora conducted the archaeological background studies, supervised the field survey and site recordation, prepared sections of the Archaeological Survey Reports (ASR) Finding of Effect Report (FOE), APE mapping, and Treatment Plan.

Years of Experience
Professional start date: 12/2002
ICF start date: 11/2021
Education
MA, Anthropology, University of West
Florida, Pensacola, FL, 2006
BA History, Salem College, WinstonSalem, NC, 2000
Page G-8.69
Iron Horse Trail Bollinger Canyon Overcrossing Project-City of San Ramon Public Works Department, San Ramon, Contra Costa County, California, 2019 – 2020 Principal Investigator/Cultural Resources Task Lead (work conducted prior to employment with ICF). Lora managed and conducted the cultural resources study incompliance with Caltrans’ regulatory responsibilities under Section 106. The study consisted of background research, including a records search and a literature review of the proposed APE; a pedestrian field survey; a Sacred Lands File search request with the Native American Heritage Commission; and preparation of and Archaeological Survey Report, and Historic Property Survey Report. The City of San Ramon Public Works Department obtained NEPA clearance for the proposed Bollinger Canyon Overcrossing Project in April 2020.

South County Recycled Water Pipeline Phase 1B/2A Project -Santa Clara Valley Water District, City of Gilroy, Santa Clara County, California, 2017 – 2018 Project Manager/Cultural Resources Task Lead (work conducted prior to employment with ICF).

Lora conducted the cultural resources study in support of the proposed installation of 12,200 linear feet of recycled water transmission and distribution pipeline. Because the project was funded by the Bureau of Reclamation, this study was conducted to address requirements of Section 106. The study consisted of background research, including a records search and a literature review of the proposed APE; a pedestrian field survey; and a Sacred Lands File search request with the Native American Heritage Commission. The report was prepared in accordance with BOR Mid-Pacific Region General Scope of Work for Cultural Resources Investigations in California.

Carmel Riverbank Stabilization Project-Monterey Peninsula Water Management District, Carmel, Monterey County, California, 2017 – 2018.

Project Manager/Cultural Resources Task Lead (work conducted prior to employment with ICF).

Lora conducted the cultural resources study proposed Carmel Riverbank stabilization at San Carlos Road Project in Carmel, Monterey County, California. The project required a Corps Section 404 Nationwide Permit; due to this, the study also complied with Section 106. The study consisted of background research, including a records search and a literature review of the proposed APE; a pedestrian field survey; a Sacred Lands File search request with the Native American Heritage Commission; consultation with local Native American tribes and interested parties; eligibility evaluation, and FOE. The study identified the Rancho San Carlos Road Sedge Bed (sedge bed) within the APE. This sedge bed represents a Native American plant gathering area on the bank of Carmel River that is an important source of Santa Barbara sedge (Carex barbarae) for the Rumsen Ohlone.

Alpine Road Trail Improvements Project- Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, San Mateo County, California San Mateo County, California, 2019 – 2020 Project Archaeologist (work conducted prior to employment with ICF). The proposed project consisted of the repairs and rehabilitation of the failed sections of the Alpine Road Trail at Coal Creek Open Space Preserve. Due to lack of maintenance and recent storms, this former vehicle road has been damaged by landslides and other slope failures, including the failure of a 220-foot-long, 48- inch-wide culvert. Ms. Holland conducted the cultural resources survey and assisted in the preparation of the environmental documentation in compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Section 106.

San Francisco International Airport Runway Safety Project -City and County of San Francisco, San Mateo County, California, 2012 – 2015
Cultural Resources Task Lead (work conducted prior to employment with ICF). The City and County of San Francisco, as owner and operator of San Francisco International Airport (SFO), constructed various improvements to the Runway Safety Areas of runways to enhance safety at SFO. In accordance with the mitigation requirements for development of this project, Lora and monitoring staff conducted archaeological monitoring of excavation activities as required by the Section 106 consultation process between the Federal Aviation Administration and the State Historic Preservation Office. Ms. Holland served as the cultural resources lead for the multi-year project, coordinated the cultural resources monitoring, oversaw monitoring staff, and prepared the Archaeological Monitoring Reports.

Page G-8.70
Jennifer Wildt, PhD, RPA
Cultural Resources Specialist
Dr. Jennifer Wildt has over 15 years of archaeological experience, working for Cultural Resource Management firms, the National Park Service, in museums, and at universities. She has a wide range of experience throughout the United States and Guatemala. Dr. Wildt is a member of the Register of Professional archaeologists and earned her Ph.D. in Archaeology from Boston University. She meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for archaeology.

Dr. Wildt has extensive experience in historical and prehistoric archaeology. As a project manager, her duties include project oversight, proposal writing, budgeting, QA/QC, meeting with clients and regulatory agencies, employee mentoring, directing fieldwork, research, technical writing, and editing. She is well-versed in CEQA, NEPA, Section 106 and Section 110, has worked on phase 1, 2, and 3 projects, and has managed projects of all sizes with budgets from a few thousand dollars to over a million dollars.

Project Experience
San Francisco Housing Element, Archaeological Sensitivity Analysis – City of San Francisco, CA, 2020-2021.

Primary Author. Developed, directed, and co-wrote Archaeological Sensitivity Analysis for the City of San Francisco. This document will drive archaeological research associated with construction projects in the City and is based on the housing development plans for the next 30 years.

San Rafael Transit Center Environmental Impact Report – City of San Rafael, CA, 2020-2021.

Cultural chapters author. Wrote chapters on potential
environmental impacts to Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources. Researched archaeological and historical past of San Rafael and the development of the city. Based on the past and environmental conditions, analyzed potential impacts to cultural and tribal cultural resources.

Commonwealth Building 3 Environmental Impact Report – City of Menlo Park, CA, 2021.

Cultural chapters author. Wrote chapters on potential
environmental impacts to Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources. Researched archaeological and historical past of San Rafael and the development of the city. Based on the past and environmental conditions, analyzed potential impacts to cultural and tribal cultural resources.

Alemany Boulevard Pavement Renovation and Sewer
Replacement Project – San Francisco Public Utilities
Commission, San Francisco, CA, 2021.

Years of Experience
Professional start date: 2001
ICF start date: 10/2020
Education
Ph.D., M.A. Archaeology, Boston
University, 2015
B.A., Archaeology, University of
Virginia, 2001
Page G-8.71
Lead author. Analyzed and summarized archaeological monitoring logs to write report for monitoring project replacing water infrastructure.
88 Broadway/735 Davis St. Housing Project—Bridge Housing, San Francisco, CA, 2017-2020.

Project Director. While at PaleoWest, Dr. Wildt directed an archaeological compliance project for an affordable housing project being built by Bridge Housing, as required by the City and County of San Francisco. The project was in an archaeologically sensitive area of San Francisco and required extensive testing. Dr. Wildt authored an archaeological research design and treatment plan addendum/update for testing and monitoring that identified prehistoric and historical archaeologically sensitive areas, developed a testing plan, and outlined procedures to follow during archaeological testing and monitoring. Dr. Wildt coordinated with the client and San Francisco Planning cultural resources staff and worked to develop a public archaeology display for the lobbies of the two buildings.

Transbay Block 9 Archaeological Monitoring—Essex Homes, San Francisco, CA, 2016-2019.

Project Director. While at PaleoWest, in accordance with the project’s construction permit, Dr. Wildt was responsible for overall project direction and oversight, preparation of the scope of work, budget, reporting oversight, QA/QC, client and agency coordination for construction of a 43-story tower. She co-authored the archaeological results report for the City and County of San Francisco for the testing and monitoring phases. The project used a consolidated version of the Section 106 process agreed to by the Memorandum of Agreement between the Federal Transit Administration, the Federal Transit Administration, and the Federal Railroad Administration, and the California State Historic Preservation Officer; San Francisco Office of Community Investment was the lead agency.

Crittenden Lane Water Line Extension Project and Trailhead Improvements Archaeological Survey—Circlepoint, Mountain View, CA, 2017, 2019.

Project Director. While at PaleoWest, Dr. Wildt was responsible for overall project direction and oversight, preparation of the scope of work, budget, reporting oversight, and QA/QC, for the installation of a water line and trailhead improvements.

MIRO Towers Archaeological Testing—Bayview Development, San Jose, CA, 2017-2018.

Project Director. While at PaleoWest, Dr. Wildt developed an archaeological research design and treatment plan for testing a building site in downtown San Jose. Dr. Wildt was responsible for overall project direction and oversight, directed test excavations including backhoe trenching, and authored archaeological resources report that was accepted by the City of San Jose with no revisions.

Transbay Bus Storage Archaeological Testing—Transbay Joint Powers Authority, San Francisco, CA, 2016-2018.

Project Director. While at PaleoWest, Dr. Wildt directed archaeological testing in advance of construction of new Bus Storage facility by the TJPA in downtown San Francisco. The project used a consolidated version of the Section 106 process agreed to by the Memorandum of Agreement between the Federal Transit Administration, the Federal Transit Administration, and the Federal Railroad Administration, and the California State Historic Preservation Officer. Dr. Wildt implemented archaeological testing including backhoe trenching, supervised artifact curation, and was responsible for overall project direction. She co-authored an archaeological results report for the City and County of San Francisco.

The Grove Archaeological Monitoring—Edenbridge Homes, Mountain View, CA, 2016-2017.

Project Director. While at PaleoWest, Dr. Wildt was responsible for overall project direction, preparation of SOWs, budget, monitoring, reporting, and QA/QC during the construction of a residential neighborhood near an archaeologically sensitive stream in Mountain View.

Page G-8.72
Jonathon Rusch, MA
Senior Historic Preservation Specialist
Jon Rusch is an architectural historian and historic preservation specialist with over 10 years of professional experience supporting public agencies and private-sector clients as they develop plans for historic buildings and cultural landscapes. His work has spanned the United States—with a focus on the Midwest and West Coast—and has involved preparing context studies and evaluating the historic resource status of properties in urban and rural settings. Jon has contributed to many regulatory documents that identify historic resources and assess development and rehabilitation projects for adherence to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and other regulatory standards. He utilizes his skills to assist clients comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Section 106 and Section 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). In his work with agency clients and members of the public, Jon meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for Architectural History.

Willow Village Master Plan Project Environmental Impact Report—City of Menlo Park, Menlo Park, California, 01/2021 – Present
Historic Preservation Specialist. Jon has served as the lead builtenvironment cultural resources author of the environmental document for a master plan that proposes new development, public realm improvements, and transportation features within an existing industrial and office park in Menlo Park. Jon’s role has involved preparing a detailed peer review of another consultant’s historical resource evaluation of the buildings currently located within the plan area and project impacts assessment, which ensured those documents meet industry standards and adequately support a defensible CEQA analysis. Jon has also drafted the cultural resources section of the project’s environmental impact report, which includes analysis of proposed tunnel construction on a historically significant railroad line.

San Francisco Housing Element Update Historic Context
Statements and Environmental Impact Report—City and County of San Francisco Planning Department, San Francisco, CA, 09/2020 – Present
Historic Preservation Specialist. Jon is currently a key staff member supporting built environment analysis for the City and County of San Francisco’s update to the housing element of its general plan. The document will introduce policies with far-reaching effects for housing development in San Francisco; an assessment of its potential impacts to historic buildings and structures citywide requires thoughtful and innovative approaches. Jon has drafted a historic theme study on small flats and apartment buildings, a common residential typology across the city that nevertheless has received little targeted attention in past investigations. Jon also serves as lead author of historic built environment analysis in the housing element’s Environmental Impact Report, for which he has worked closely with City staff to develop analysis frameworks that Years of Experience
Professional start date: 07/2012
ICF start date: 07/2017
Education
MA, Historic Preservation
Planning, Cornell University, 2013
BA, Geography and Scandinavian
Studies, University of Minnesota,
2006
Professional Affiliations
Member, National Council on
Public History
Member, Vernacular Architecture
Forum
Member, Docomomo US
Page G-8.73
assess potential impacts across a large geographic area and also touch on critical issues like social equity that are intertwined with housing construction in the city.

Better Market Street Environmental Impact Report, Section 106/NEPA Documents, and Mitigation Implementation—San Francisco Department of Public Works, San Francisco, CA, 2018 – Present Historic Preservation Specialist. Jon has contributed to the development of the Environmental Impact Report and various Caltrans Section 106 and NEPA documentation for the Better Market Street project.

Jon’s role in the project has involved reviewing and synthesizing previous documentation for historic architectural resources within and adjacent to the project corridor and crafting detailed impact statements that analyze the project’s impacts to historical resources, which include a complex and large-scale cultural landscape district. Jon continues to support the project by completing deliverables that meet a detailed mitigation program: he specifically has planned a filmed tour of the Market Street corridor and has collaborated with a designer to develop the project’s interpretive plan, which encompasses display boards, temporary exhibit, and website.
1868 Ogden Drive Project Historical Resource Evaluation and Environmental Impact Report—City of Burlingame, Burlingame, California, 02/2020 – 10/2020 Historic Preservation Specialist. Jon oversaw the completion of technical studies and cultural resources environmental analysis for a project that proposes to replace an existing low-rise office building with a new multi-unit residential building. Because the existing building was more than 50 years old, it required evaluation for California Register of Historical Resources eligibility. Upon evaluation, ICF architectural historians found that the building had historical significance associated with mid-20th-century conflicts between the United Farm Workers of America and the Western Conference of Teamsters and was the site of an important jurisdictional agreement signed by Cesar Chavez. The significance of the building elevated the required CEQA document to an environmental impact report. Jon provided quality control for the building evaluation to ensure its clarity and accuracy and subsequently advised the project sponsor and planning department staff on the process-related implications of ICF’s evaluation. Jon provided input on potential project changes that may avoid an environmental impact report, as well as the anticipated alternatives analysis and mitigation commitments that the document would include. Jon was a primary author of the cultural resources section of the environmental impact report, which formally analyzed the project’s impacts to the significant resource.

The Hub Public Realm Plan Historic Resource Survey and Environmental Impact Report—City and County of San Francisco Planning Department, San Francisco, CA, 01/2018 – 07/2019 Project Manager and Historic Preservation Specialist. Jon managed the team of architectural historians completing an intensive-level survey of age-eligible properties in the Hub neighborhood of San Francisco. The survey produced Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523A and 523B form sets for each property, including evaluations of the properties’ eligibility for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources. Jon’s role involved training staff, coordinating research and field survey, and conducting QC review of major deliverables. Jon also served as lead author of the cultural resources section of the Environmental Impact Report for the Hub Plan, a complex neighborhood planning document that proposes new zoning controls and streetscape improvements.

Employment History
ICF. Architectural Historian/Historic Preservation Specialist. San Francisco, California and Minneapolis, Minnesota. 07/2017 – Present.

Page & Turnbull. Architectural Historian/Cultural Resources Planner. San Francisco, California. 03/2014 – 07/2017.

Colorado State University Center for Environmental Management of Military Lands. Project Historian. Fort Wainwright, Alaska. 06/2013 – 12/2013.

National Park Service. Cultural Landscape Inventory Intern. Omaha, Nebraska. 07/2012 – 04/2013.

Page G-8.74
Nicole Felicetti, MS
Historic Preservation Specialist
Nicole Felicetti joined ICF's San Francisco office in July 2021 as a historic preservation s pecialist. She holds a master's degree in Historic Preservation and has diverse experience in cultural resource management and interpretation, architecture, and public history.

Before joining ICF's Cultural Resources team, Nicole worked for The Woodlands, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization and National Historic Landmark District, in multi-faceted preservation, interpretation, and community engagement opportunities. Her combined professional and educational experiences across history and architecture have provided a robust foundation to the evolving landscape of cultural resource management.

Project Experience
Better Market Street—City of San Francisco Department of Public Works, San Francisco, CA, 09/2021 – Present
Historic Preservation Specialist. ICF is contributing a series of technical documents supporting environmental review under Section 106, NEPA, and CEQA for the Better Market Street project. Nicole provides supplementary support for the Historic American Landscapes Survey documentation team by assisting in the conditions assessment and historical report. Nicole is also coauthoring the historic preservation treatment plan for the Embarcadero, Hallidie, and UN Plazas, including the
contextualization of plaza histories, the assessment of characterdefining features, and recommendations for rehabilitation.

Drake and Harrington Substation Decommissioning Project— Pacific Gas and Electric, Arbuckle, CA, 12/2021 – Present Historic Preservation Specialist. ICF is conducting a study in compliance with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation regulatory responsibilities under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Nicole is composing two California DPR 523 forms for the two PG&E substations and co-authoring the finding of effect technical report.

Bay Area Regional Transit Systemwide Evaluation—San
Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), San Francisco, CA, 11/2021 – 12/2021
Historic Preservation Specialist. ICF was scoped to prepare 10 DPR 523 forms to evaluate various properties in the BART system for NRHP and CRHR eligibility. Nicole conducted fieldwork in documentation and photography for multiple BART station interiors and exteriors throughout the Bay Area, and researched and composed a California DPR 523 form for the Montgomery Station.

Delta Conveyance Program—California Department of Water Resources (DWR), San Joaquin Valley, CA, 10/2021 – 12/2022 Historic Preservation Specialist. ICF supports the DWR in the environmental review and planning process by creating new CEQA and NEPA documents, consultation on endangered species, and establishing programmatic agreements for Cultural and Tribal Years of Experience
Professional start date: 05/2018
ICF start date: 07/2021
Education
MS, Historic Preservation,
University of Pennsylvania, 2021
BA, Architecture, University of
Kentucky, 2018
Certifications/Registrations
Secretary of the Interior’s
Professional Qualification
Standards for Architectural History
Professional Affiliations
Memberships with the National
Trust for Historic Preservation,
Vernacular Architecture Forum,
and the Society of Architectural
Historians
Page G-8.75
resources. Nicole researched, updated, and edited nearly twenty California DPR 523 forms for known eligible and ineligible historic properties. Nicole also conducted and compiled archival research in the Alameda, Contra Costa, and San Joaquin Counties Clerk-Recorder offices for deeds, building permits, and architectural drawings.
1421 Old County Road—Madison Group, Unincorporated San Mateo County, CA, 08/2021 – 11/2021
Historic Preservation Specialist. Nicole performed cultural resources research of industrial and commercial properties within unincorporated San Mateo County. Nicole prepared, wrote, and compiled five California DPR 523 forms, including primary records, building descriptions, and support imagery for properties within the APE. She also researched and wrote a historic context and site history for postWorld War II industrial development in San Mateo County to support a built technical report.

Richards Boulevard I-5 Interchange PA&ED—City of Sacramento, Sacramento, CA, 07/2021 – 10/2021
Historic Preservation Specialist. ICF supports the City of Sacramento and Caltrans in environmental documentation under CEQA and NEPA based on current regulatory and environmental conditions. A series of technical study documentation was completed, including a Historic Property Survey Report.

Nicole updated three California DPR 523 forms for known historic properties and evaluated six other properties built before 1973 to prepare DPR 523 forms. Nicole also wrote historic contexts for Mid-century Modern restaurants and industrial buildings in the Sacramento area.

Edwardian-era Architectural Context Statement at The San Francisco Planning Department— San Francisco, CA, 05/2020 – 09/2020
Citywide Historic Resources Survey Intern. While employed at the San Francisco Planning Department, Nicole conducted historic, photographic, and archival research to compose an Edwardianera Residential Architectural Context Statement as part of a multi-year, comprehensive narrative of San Francisco's historic and cultural resources. Nicole identified patterns of development, building typologies, development significance, and other criteria to create a framework within which preservation staff and other professionals can contextually identify, interpret, and evaluate the city's housing stock from 1901 to 1915. Additional context statement deliverables included ArcGIS-generated maps, technical analysis of local and state regulations, and two-dimensional graphic design.

Historic Preservation, Interpretation, and Community Engagement at The Woodlands— Philadelphia, PA, 08/2019 – 05/2021
Historic Site Assistant. While employed at The Woodlands, Nicole worked closely with the Program/Operations Manager to support social programs, site interpretation, and collaboration with community partners. Nicole created educational and promotional content for the organization's official website and social media accounts, including ArcGIS-supported digital tours, digitized photographic collections, published local histories, and branded graphic design. As both a historic site and a public park, The Woodlands hosted many public events and community engagement opportunities while preserving the historic landscape and buildings. Nicole partnered with local historical and arts organizations to develop and support educational programs for the greater West Philadelphia community, including a volunteer gardening program, membership events, historic reenactments, and fundraisers.

Employment History
ICF. Historic Preservation Specialist. San Francisco, CA. 07/2021 – Present.

The Woodlands. Historic Site Assistant. Philadelphia, PA. 08/2019 – 05/2021.

San Francisco Planning Department. Citywide Historic Resources Survey Intern. San Francisco, CA. 06/2020 – 09/2020.

Luckett & Farley. Architectural Designer. Louisville, KY. 05/2018 – 08/2019.

Page G-8.76
Diana C. Roberts, MA
Environmental Planner/Project Coordinator
Ms. Roberts is a senior writer and project manager in ICF’s San Jose office. As a project manager, she prepares and reviews California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)/National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) environmental compliance documents, coordinates the activities of multidisciplinary teams, and facilitates communication and information flow among team members. As a writer, she focuses on geological resources, paleontological resources, hazards and hazardous materials, and agricultural lands analyses for CEQA/NEPA environmental compliance documents and technical reports. She works on a variety of development, local jurisdiction planning, road and rail transportation, environmental restoration, and water and conservation planning projects to ensure that deliverables meet client needs and regulatory requirements.

Project Experience
Facebook Willow Village EIR—City of Menlo Park, CA, 2020 – Present
Task Lead. Ms. Roberts serves as task lead for geology, soils, paleontological resources, and hazards and hazardous materials.

This project would redevelop an approximately 59-acre industrial site, plus 2 parcels west of Willow Road, as a multiphase, mixed-use development. The project would construct new buildings, establish various open space areas, install infrastructure within a new Residential/Shopping District, Town Square District, and Campus District, alter two parcels to accommodate realignment of Hamilton Avenue, and construct an undercrossing to provide tram and pedestrian access to neighboring Facebook campuses. Primary issues include hazards and hazardous materials.
1075 O’Brien Drive IS/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND)— City of Menlo Park, CA, 2020 – 2021
Technical Lead. Ms. Roberts served as technical lead for geology, soils, paleontological resources, and hazards and hazardous materials. This project would construct an industrial building for research and development, commercial, and office uses, along with a five-level parking structure. The project includes new hazardous materials storage bunkers and a utility yard.
1125 O’Brien Drive IS/MND—City of Menlo Park, CA, 2019 – 2021 Technical Lead. Ms. Roberts served as technical lead for geology, soils, paleontological resources, and hazards and hazardous materials. This project would construct an industrial building for research and development uses, as well as surface parking. Primary issues include hazards and hazardous materials.

SRI International Campus Modernization Project EIR—City of Menlo Park, California (2015–2016)
Technical Lead. Ms. Roberts served as technical lead for geology, soils, and paleontological resources. SRI International proposed to modernize its campus with phased development over the next 25 years, amend the existing employee cap, and modify other land use regulations governing the site.

Years of Experience
Professional start date: 08/1997
ICF start date: 01/2004
Education
MA, Linguistics, Cornell University,
1991
BS, Applied Psychology, Georgia
Institute of Technology, 1982
Professional Affiliations
American Geophysical Union
Association of Environmental
Professionals
Professional Soil Scientists
Association of California
Page G-8.77
San Francisco Housing Element Update—City and County of San Francisco, CA, 2021 – Present Task Lead. Ms. Roberts serves as task lead for geology, soils, and paleontological resources. This project will update the Housing Element to meet future housing demands. The Housing Element update would shift an increased share of the City and County of San Francisco’s future housing growth to transit corridors and low-density residential districts.

The Hub Plan, 30 Van Ness Avenue Project, 98 Franklin Street Project, and Hub Housing Sustainability District Program and Project Initial Study (IS) and Environmental Impact Report (EIR)—City and County of San Francisco, CA, 2018 – 2020 Technical Lead. Ms. Roberts served as technical lead for geology, soils, seismicity, and paleontological resources and hazards and hazardous materials. The proposed Hub Plan would change the residential density of the Hub Plan area and increase height limits on buildings. The Hub Plan area is entirely within the Market and Octavia Plan Area. It is also within the Downtown/Civic Center, SoMa, Western Addition, and Mission neighborhoods..

West Oakland Link CEQA and NEPA Evaluation—Bay Area Toll Authority/California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), San Francisco/Oakland, CA, 2020 – Present Project Manager/Technical Author. Ms. Roberts serves as project manager and technical author for geology and soils, paleontological resources, and hazards and hazardous materials. This project would construct a bicycle path, elevated for approximately 1.1 miles of its overall 2.7-mile length, in an area of West Oakland with dense traffic, traffic structures, industrial uses, and emerging residential and mixeduse centers. The project is complex due to the industrial nature of the site and agency and private stakeholders. Primary issues include air quality, noise, aesthetics, biological resources, and historical resources.

Station District Specific Plan Existing Conditions Report and EIR—City of Union City, CA, 2019 – Present
Technical Lead. Ms. Roberts serves as technical lead for geology, soils, and paleontological resources.

This project involves developing an Existing Conditions Report and EIR for the update to the 2006 Decoto Industrial Park Study Area Specific Plan (now referred to as the Station District Specific Plan). The purpose of the Station District Specific Plan is to promote the redevelopment of an area of Union City occupied by aging industrial uses, by replacing it with a mix of office, light industrial, retail, and residential uses.

San Bruno Bayhill Specific Plan EIR—City of San Bruno, CA, 2017 – 2021 Technical Lead. Ms. Roberts served as technical lead for geology, soils, and paleontological resources, and hazards and hazardous materials. This project involved developing an Existing Conditions Report and EIR for a new Specific Plan for the 73-acre Bayhill Office Park, which is San Bruno’s largest employment cluster, employing about one-third of the 15,000 employees in the city. The project would accommodate the anticipated expansion of YouTube by adding additional office square footage, while creating a pedestrian-friendly and cohesive mixed-use community that enhances the area’s identity and image and provides greater linkages to nearby public transportation opportunities.

California High-Speed Train, Los Angeles to Anaheim Section Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/EIR—California High-Speed Rail (HSR) Authority, Los Angeles and Orange Counties, CA, (Subconsultant to STV), 2017 – Present
Deputy Project Manager/Task Lead. Ms. Roberts serves as deputy project manager and task lead for agricultural and paleontological resources and as technical author for geology, soils, seismicity, hazardous materials, and wastes; for the introduction to analysis; and for the preferred alternative. This project section of the California HSR System would extend approximately 30 miles, starting at Los Angeles Union Station south to the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center in Anaheim, with stations in between. This corridor runs through a narrow and constrained urban environment, with other rail operators in the area.

Page G-8.78
Zachary Cornejo, MS
Environmental Planner
Zachary Cornejo is an environmental planner with more than four years of experience working on a range of habitat conservation plans, development, public works, and transportation projects. He has experience preparing environmental documentation and technical studies in compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and the National Transportation Act of 1966 (Section 4(f) process).

Zachary’s experience includes all aspects of project management, including environmental documentation, technical study preparation, subcontractor oversight, managing project budgets and schedules, and coordination with federal, state, local agencies.

Project Experience
San Francisco Housing Element Update EIR—San Francisco
Planning Department, San Francisco, CA, August 2021 –
Present.

Environmental Planner. The San Francisco Planning Department is proposing to update the housing element of the San Francisco General Plan. The EIR evaluates the impacts that could result from adoption and implementation of the San Francisco Housing Element 2022 Update, which is an updates to the adopted 2014 Housing Element of the general plan. Zachary serves as the primary author of the public services, parks and recreation, wildfire, minerals, and agricultural sections of the EIR.

Mission Bay School Project—San Francisco Unified School District, San Francisco, CA, December 2020 – August 2021.

Environmental Planner. Zachary supported the preparation of the focused EIR and initial study prepared for this project and served as the primary author of the Utilities and Service Systems section. The Utilities and Service Systems section analysed impacts to water supply, wastewater, stormwater, solid waste, and electricity and telecommunications facilities associated with the project. The project included the construction of a multi-story, up to 105,700-square-foot school, which would include a preschool, transitional kindergarten, kindergarten-through-fifth grade elementary school, linked learning hub, professional learning space, outdoor learning area, outdoor play area, and paved surface parking lot.

San Rafael Transit Center Project—Golden Gate Bridge,
Highway, and Transportation District, San Rafael, CA, 2020 – Present.

Environmental Planner. Zachary served as the primary author of the Transportation section of the project EIR. Additionally, Zachary served as the co-author of the Aesthetics/Visual Impacts section of the EIR. This project plans to construct a new transit center in the downtown portion of the City of San Rafael to address existing operational deficiencies and provide a safe and appealing center for public transit. The project is high profile and located within an urban environment result in complex environmental constraints pertaining to community impacts, noise impacts, traffic impacts, and aesthetic/visual impacts.

Years of Experience
Professional start date: 06/2017
ICF start date: 11/2020
Education
MS, Natural Resource
Stewardship, Colorado State
University, 2019
BS, Environmental Science and
Management, University of
California Davis, 2017
Page G-8.79
Corby Battery Energy Storage System—City of Vacaville, CA, 02/2021 – Present Environmental Planner. ICF is preparing a critical issues analysis, EIR, and conditional use permit to construct a new battery energy storage system (BESS) facility in the northeast portion of the City of Vacaville. The BESS facility would help the state secure its electrical utility systems during the summer and fall season in accordance with Governor Newson’s emergency mandate in February 2021. The proposed project would construct approximately 60 acres of new BESS facilities to capture unused electricity produced during high generation periods for use during low generation periods. Issues associated with this project include land use conflicts, labor union disputes, and impacts to wetlands and water of the US. water and stormwater, air quality, and visual resources Zachary has drafted the critical issues analysis and is assisting with project coordination.

State Route 131 Capital Preventative Maintenance Project—Caltrans District 4, Marin County, CA, November 2021 – Present.

Project Manager. Zachary manages the preparation of the project IS/MND and coordination with Caltrans the production of the project description. Caltrans District 4 implemented the approximately 4.5 mile long project in Marin County t to improve the serviceability and ride quality of SR 131 along. Project improvements include improving existing safety features, upgrading signage, improving pavement delineation, rehabilitating drainage facilities, and modifying electrical systems within the Project area.

Last Chance Grade Project—Caltrans District 1, Crescent City, CA, 2020 – Present.

Deputy Project Manager. Zachary coordinates with Caltrans and biological subconsultants to ensure that biological surveys are conducted according to agreed upon standards. Specifically, Zachary manages information and equipment needs for biological subconsultants and conveys survey status and concerns to Caltrans on a weekly bases. This project plans to reconstruct a 3-mile segment of US 101, between Klamath and Crescent City, that is subject to persistent landslides and road failures. The project alignments are located in a highly sensitive biological area and Caltrans has required extensive biological surveying to document existing conditions and accurately forecast project impacts.

State Route 239 Project—Contra Costa County Transportation Authority, 2020 – Present.

Deputy Project Manager. Zachary coordinates with project stakeholders and regulatory agencies and assists the project management team with directing internal document preparation and review.

Additionally, Zachary works in tandem with the project manager to ensure that subconsultants have updated project details and project site access permissions. This project plans to construct a new state route north-south connection in eastern contra costa and alameda counties. The project is high profile and complex and includes a number of environmental constraints, primarily including wetland resources, biological resources, community impacts, noise impacts and traffic impacts.

Employment History
ICF. Environmental Planner. San Francisco, CA. 11/2020 – Present Dewberry | Drake Haglan. Staff Environmental Scientist. Sacramento, CA. 01/2019 – 10/2020.

Drake Haglan & Associates. Associate Environmental Planner. Sacramento, CA. 06/2017 – 01/2019.

Page G-8.80
Katrina Sukola
Project Role: Hydrology and Water Quality
Katrina Sukola has experience in water and sediment quality, metal and nutrient analysis, and contaminant analysis in aquatic environments. She has managed and conducted fieldwork including river and coastal assessments such as the U.S. EPA’s National Coastal Assessment, habitat assessments for herring, restoration projects including habitat restoration for red-legged frogs in the Eldorado National Forest, and monitoring programs for marine aquatic invasive species. Katrina has also designed and implemented environmental monitoring programs and coordinated fieldwork including surface and stormwater sampling.

Katrina prepares a variety of environmental documents including Environmental Impact Reports/Statements (EIRs/EISs),
Environmental Assessments (EAs), Initial Studies (ISs), Mitigated Negative Declarations (MNDs), and technical reports related to water resources, and experienced in environmental compliance pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). She is thoroughly familiar with water resource issues, water quality regulatory compliance, and experienced with review of permits such as wastewater, stormwater, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), and municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) permits, and environmental management plans including ocean management plans and fisheries management policy.

Project Experience
Facebook Willow Village EIR—City of Menlo Park, CA, 05/2020 – 04/2022
Hydrology and Water Quality Lead Author. Katrina serves as task lead for surface water hydrology, groundwater resources, water quality, and flood impacts. This project would redevelop an approximately 59-acre industrial site, plus 2 parcels west of Willow Road, as a multiphase, mixed-use development. The project would construct new buildings, establish various open space areas, install infrastructure within a new Residential/Shopping District, Town Square District, and Campus District, alter two parcels to accommodate realignment of Hamilton Avenue, and construct an undercrossing to provide tram and pedestrian access to neighboring Facebook campuses. Primary issues include existing contaminated groundwater, increased flooding, and adaptation to sea level rise.

Bayhill Specific Plan EIR— City of San Bruno, California, 3/2019 – 09/2021
Hydrology and Water Quality Lead Author. The Bayhill Specific Plan Area encompasses approximately 92.2 acres and made up of 17 large parcels. The Plan Area is part of a 20-year campus expansion plan to be developed in five phases. The project considers approximately 2.46 million square feet of new commercial and potentially residential development, with significant subterranean parking. Katrina authored the hydrology and water quality section of the EIR.

Years of Experience
Professional start date: 08/2004
ICF start date: 06/2015
Education
MS Chemistry, University of
Manitoba, 2003
BS Environmental Chemistry,
University of Waterloo, 2001
Page G-8.81
Southline Specific Plan EIR — City of South San Francisco, South San Francisco, California, 03/2020 – 04/2022
Hydrology and Water Quality Lead Author. The Southline Specific Plan encompasses the 26-acre Southline Specific Plan Area. The proposed project would demolish all existing industrial uses on-site and construct seven office buildings, an amenities building, underground parking throughout the site, a parking structure, a new road connection, and approximately 369,000-square feet of open space.

Development of the proposed project would be phased, including a Phase I. In total, the project is anticipated to have a maximum building area of 2.8 million-square feet. Katrina authored the hydrology and water quality section of the EIR.
751 Gateway Boulevard Project EIR - San Francisco No. 40, LLC, City of South San Francisco, California, 1/2020 – 6/2020
Hydrology and Water Quality Lead Author. Katrina authored the Hydrology and Water Quality section for the 751 Gateway Boulevard Project Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The project included redevelop of a 7.4-acre, irregularly shaped site within the City of South San Francisco’s Gateway Specific Plan planning area. The proposed project involves the construction of a seven-story building with approximately 208,8000 sf of usable space (60 percent research and development uses, and 40 percent office uses).
555 & 777 West Middlefield EIRs—City of Mountain View, California, 12/2017 – 10/2021 Hydrology and Water Quality Lead Author. The 555 West Middlefield Project includes retaining the 402 existing multi-family residential units and the construction of 348 new residential units in 2 separate buildings on 7 acres of existing surface parking lot. The 777 West Middlefield Project includes the demolition of the existing on-site buildings and construction of up to 716 new residential units in 3 buildings with subterranean parking.
1075 O’Brien Drive IS/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND)—City of Menlo Park, CA, 11/2020 – 04/2021
Hydrology and Water Quality Lead Author. Katrina served as technical lead for surface water hydrology, groundwater resources, water quality, and flood impacts. This project would construct an industrial building for research and development, commercial, and office uses, along with a five-level parking structure. Primary issues include changes in stormwater runoff and development within the 100- year floodplain.
1125 O’Brien Drive IS/MND—City of Menlo Park, CA, 10/2019 – 06/2021 Hydrology and Water Quality Lead Author. Katrina served as technical lead for surface water hydrology, groundwater resources, water quality, and flood impacts. This project would construct an industrial building for research and development uses, as well as surface parking. The project includes reduced impervious surfaces and bioretention area and flow-through planter to capture and treat runoff.

SF Giants Mission Rock Seawall Lot 337 Pier 48 EIR—Seawall Los 37 Associates LLC, San Francisco, California, 09/2015 – 06/2017
Hydrology and Water Quality Lead Author. Katrina authored the Hydrology and Water Quality section for the SF Giants Mission Rock Seawall Lot 337 Pier 48 Project EIR documents. The 27-acre mixed use project involves development of residential, commercial, light industrial, active/retail, and open space as well as the rehabilitation and reuse of Pier 48. The project is located adjacent to marginal wharf, China Basin Park and Terry A. Francois Boulevard in the City of San Francisco.

Facebook Constitution Campus Expansion—City of Menlo Park, California, 5/2015 – 08/2016 Hydrology and Water Quality Specialist. Katrina authored the Hydrology and Water Quality section for the Facebook Constitution Campus Expansion Environmental Impact Report (EIR) documents. The project included the redevelopment of an existing industrial site with two new office buildings and a hotel. The project is located within the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Bay Water Board.

Page G-8.82
Key Role
Mr. Doezema focuses on affordable housing nexus, fiscal and economic impact analysis, successor agency finance services and sports facilities.

Inclusionary Housing and Affordable Housing Nexus Analyses Mr. Doezema has experience with affordable housing nexus and inclusionary housing assignments for a wide range of communities throughout California. Recent assignments have included a multi-jurisdiction nexus study covering 12 Bay Area jurisdictions, Boulder CO, Emeryville, Newark, Hayward, Fremont, and Mountain View. Large city experience includes San Diego, San Jose, San Francisco and Honolulu. He has prepared project-specific affordable housing analyses addressing the Facebook Campus in Menlo Park and the Stanford Medical Center in Palo Alto.

Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis
Mr. Doezema has experience preparing fiscal impact analyses on projects throughout California spanning a wide variety of land uses including master planned communities, military base reuse plans, medical facilities, and mixed-use projects. Recent assignment include a fiscal impact analysis of a voter initiative in Alameda and a fiscal and economic impact peer review of an NFL stadium in Inglewood.

Successor Agency Finance
Mr. Doezema assists cities and counties in relation to redevelopment dissolution including preparation and review of recognized obligation payment schedules, cash flow analyses, and fiscal consultant reports for refinance of tax allocation bonds. He has been responsible for on-going pass through calculations for all 13 successor agencies in San Mateo County on behalf the County Controller’s Office.

Sports Facilities
Mr. Doezema had a key role in KMA’s services to the City of Santa Clara on the Levi’s Stadium project and negotiations with the San Francisco 49ers. Mr. Doezema was involved from the initial concept through stadium opening and was responsible for analyzing numerous aspects of the project including public and private construction finance sources, funding of on-going operations of the Stadium Authority, fair market rent for the City’s land, and fiscal and economic impacts.

Professional Credentials
Mr. Doezema holds a master’s degree in urban planning and a bachelor’s degree in civil and environmental engineering from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

DAVID DOEZEMA
Mr. Doezema is a Principal in Keyser Marston Associates’ San Francisco office with 15 years’ experience in real estate and economic consulting.

Years in
the Industry
15+
Keyser Marston Associates
Page G-8.83

Gary K. Black, AICP, President
Education
Master of City Planning in Urban Transportation, University of California at Berkeley
Bachelor of Arts in Geography, University of California at Los Angeles Professional Associations
American Institute of Certified Planners
Institute of Transportation Engineers
Experience
Since 1982, Mr. Black has directed a number of transportation planning, traffic engineering, parking, and transit studies. He has prepared transportation plans for the Cities of San Jose, Palo Alto, San Mateo, and San Carlos, and areawide plans for reuse of the Bay Meadows racetrack site in San Mateo, the Cargill salt ponds site in Redwood City, and many parts of San Jose (North San Jose, Downtown, Edenvale, and Evergreen). He has prepared traffic studies for new development in most cities within the Bay Area. He also has prepared numerous parking studies, including downtown parking studies for San Carlos, San Mateo, Gilroy, and San Jose.

Representative Projects
• Areawide Transportation Plans:

Circulation Elements for General Plans in San Mateo, Sunnyvale, San Carlos, and Palo Alto.

Bay Meadows – Hexagon prepared the transportation plan for redevelopment of the Bay Meadows Race Track in San Mateo into a mixed-use, transit oriented development.

San Carlos - Citywide study involved estimating and analyzing the traffic conditions that would occur from buildout of known development sites within the city. Intersection levels of service were calculated and recommendations were made for possible transportation network improvements.

North San Jose – Hexagon developed a revised development policy for North San Jose that included a long-range forecast of traffic conditions and development of a long list of necessary transportation improvements – both roads and transit. The policy resulted in the adoption of an impact fee to fund transportation improvements.

Redwood City – Hexagon has done the transportation planning for the proposed reuse of the Cargill salt ponds in Redwood City. The potential reuse includes essentially the development of a new town with 12,000 homes, office buildings, a shopping center, and schools. • Campus Studies:

Foothill College –The campus is served by one ring road that is accessed through a single intersection. Hexagon staff recommended that the ring road be made one-way. Other recommendations were also made for better signage and lighting around the ring road.

City College – Hexagon staff was hired to measure parking demand and to determine the amount of new parking needed. Hexagon staff conducted parking occupancy surveys. Student parking in neighborhoods was estimated by comparing overnight occupancy to occupancy at typical student peak times.

IBM Campus - Hexagon staff was hired to address various problems occurring on the internal roads.

Many recommendations came out of the study, including modifying speed limits, narrowing streets, channelizing pedestrian crossings, adding signals, and modifying intersection geometries to improve sight distance.

Page G-8.84

• Site Traffic Analyses:

For offices, hotels, restaurants, residential subdivisions, apartments, schools, warehouses, industrial complexes, and mixed-use developments in San Jose, Santa Clara, Sunnyvale, Milpitas, Los Gatos, Fremont, Monterey, Palo Alto, Menlo Park, Redwood City, San Carlos, San Mateo, Los Altos, Santa Rosa, Napa, Hayward, Bakersfield, Richmond, Concord, and Cupertino, California. These included estimation of future trip generation, impacts on adjacent intersections, and site-specific pedestrian and auto circulation issues such as driveway and crosswalk locations. • Corridor Studies:

Route 238 Bypass – Mr. Black evaluated several transportation alternatives to the proposed Rte. 238 Bypass in Hayward. The Planning Area 2 Travel Forecasting model was used to project future traffic in the Central County area. The basis of the evaluation was to analyze the effects of each scenario in terms of (a) changes in traffic volumes on major roads and freeway segments, (b) congested versus uncongested vehicle miles traveled (VMT), and (c) the impacts on major street intersection operations.
• Parking Studies:

San Carlos – Staff believed that the available parking spaces were utilized to such an extent that any future development could not be accommodated. It was determined that future development could be accommodated only by planning a parking structure. A suitable site was identified, and a threelevel parking structure was designed (one level underground and two levels above). To help the financial feasibility of the parking structure, it was designed to have two levels of housing above.

San Mateo – Due to recent and projected growth, many downtown merchants believed that more parking facilities were needed. Surveys revealed that the existing parking situation was adequate, although during peak times customers sometimes had to settle for less desirable spaces because the prime spaces were taken by employees. The study was able to show that a relatively modest increase in downtown parking meter rates combined with a small property assessment could finance an additional parking structure.
• Major Developments:

Valley Fair – Valley Fair is a 1.2 million square foot regional mall that was proposed for enlargement by approximately 300,000 square feet.

Santana Row – This project transformed a 1960’s era shopping center into a mixed-use “Main Street” style shopping, entertainment and residential center.

Oakridge Mall – The proposed expansion consisted of the addition of 85,000 square feet of movie theater space plus additional retail and restaurant space.

Evergreen Specific Plan - The plan called for the construction of over 4,000 dwelling units on about 600 acres. Hexagon staff analyzed both on-site and off-site traffic impacts of the plan and developed the circulation element of the EIR.

Page G-8.85

Ollie Zhou, T.E., Vice President & Principal Associate
Education
Bachelor of Science – Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of California – Berkeley
Professional Associations
Member of the Institute of Transportation Engineers
Registered Professional Traffic Engineer in the State of California (TR 2857) Experience
Since January 2014, Mr. Zhou has managed a large variety of traffic engineering and transportation planning projects for both the public and private sectors throughout the greater San Francisco Bay Area.

These projects mainly include travel demand model validation and application, VMT analysis, general plan updates and area plans, and traffic impact studies. Mr. Zhou is experienced in managing large-scale projects and areawide plans with prolonged schedules and complicated work scopes. Mr. Zhou mainly utilizes the CUBE software package for travel demand model applications, and manage a variety of projects conducted with Synchro, SimTraffic, Vistro, TRAFFIX software.

Representative Projects
• Travel Demand Forecasting Model Development and Application Projects:
 Menlo Park Citywide Model – Model refinement and validation. Model application for the Willow Village/Facebook project, VMT policy update, and Housing Element Update  Sunnyvale Citywide Model – Model refinement and validation. Model application for the Moffett Park Specific Plan, Sunnyvale General Plan Update, Lawrence Station Area Plan, Peery Park Specific Plan, and Sunnyvale Traffic Impact Fee.
 San Mateo Citywide Model – Model development, refinement and validation. Model application for the San Mateo Traffic Impact Fee.
 10th St and 11th St two-way street conversion, San Jose – Local model validation and forecasting link-level and intersection-level volumes.
 Gilroy Downtown Specific Plan with High-Speed Rail (HSR) Station, Gilroy – Incorporated boarding-alighting data provided by HSR Authority at Gilroy Caltrain Station into the Gilroy Citywide Model to analyze three downtown specific plan alternatives. • Vehicle-Miles Travel (VMT) Analysis for residential, office, hotel, school, area plans, Housing Element Updates, and mixed-use developments throughout the greater Bay Area. Representative projects include:
 Willow Village/Facebook, Menlo Park – 1.6 million s.f. office, 1,730 housing units, 200,000 s.f. retail, 193-room hotel; project included updating City’s VMT policy, and incorporating specific project characteristics into the travel demand model for VMT calculations.  Menlo Park Housing Element Update – CEQA analysis for HEU with 4,000 housing units beyond GP buildout, spread across 16 sub-areas.
 Avenue School, San Jose – developed a hybrid VMT methodology using a combination of travel demand model and off-model processes to analyze private school; project included a 2,700 student pre-k to grade 12 private school. Using available private school student data, a custom distribution model was developed for this project.
 Danville Housing Element Update – CEQA analysis for HEU with 4,500 housing units among 8 opportunity sub-areas
 Moffett Park Specific Plan, Sunnyvale – CEQA analysis for specific plan with 33 million s.f. office/R&D, 20,000 housing units. Project incorporated specific project characteristics into the travel demand model for VMT calculations.

Page G-8.86

 Sobel Mixed-Use Development, Salinas – developed VMT methodology for a mixed-use development with 37,000 s.f. retail, 96-room motel, 4 restaurants, separate service station. • Over 50 Traffic Analyses/Traffic Feasibility Studies for area-wide plans, offices, hotels, apartments, schools, daycare centers and multiple-use developments throughout the Bay Area. • Traffic Simulation/Signal Coordination Studies for various congested corridors in San Mateo, Los Gatos, and Sunnyvale.
• Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) Update Studies for the City of San Mateo and the City of Sunnyvale.

Conducted nexus studies and calculated appropriate impact fees for the TIF Update projects. • Multi-Modal Analysis for the Palo Alto General Plan Update in Palo Alto, CA. This study included analyzing the existing and future roadway segment level-of-service for all of automobile mode, pedestrian mode, bicycle mode, and transit mode. This study followed the multi-modal analysis guidelines outlined in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), 2010 Edition. • Bicycle Level of Service Analysis for the Magee Ranch project in Danville, CA. This study utilized the bicycle level of service methodology for two-lane highway segments outlined in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), 2010 Edition.

Page G-8.87

Ling Jin, Associate
Education
Master of Science—Civil Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin Master of Engineering—Civil Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
Bachelor of Science—Civil Engineering, Tsinghua University, China Experience
Since joining Hexagon in 2004, Ms. Jin has participated in a variety of transportation engineering and planning projects throughout the Bay Area. Prior to joining Hexagon, Ms. Jin worked for two years on travel demand modeling and transportation planning projects in Philadelphia, PA. Her projects include transportation impact analyses for environmental impact reports, traffic feasibility studies, multimodal studies, travel behavior analyses, transportation demand management plans, and parking studies. Ms.

Jain has experience with TRAFFIX, Synchro/Simtraffic, ArcGIS, and Vistro software packages.

Representative Projects
•Transportation Analyses for area-wide plans. Representative projects include Patrick Henry Drive Specific Plan in Santa Clara, CA, and Freedom Circle Focus Area Plan in Santa Clara, CA • Traffic Impact Analyses and Vehicle-Miles Travel (VMT) Analysis for offices, apartments, schools, and mixed-use developments throughout the Bay Area. Representative projects include:
 200 Twin Dolphin Drive Office Development - Redwood City, CA  505 East Bayshore Road Residential Development - Redwood City  1350 Adams Court Office EIR - Menlo Park, CA
 3723 Haven Avenue Hotel Transportation Analysis - Menlo Park, CA  550 Piercy Road Industrial Development – San Jose, CA • Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plans for both small and large projects in a variety of settings, incorporating current best practices for reducing single-occupant vehicle trips. Each plan has been tailored to the specific project and the requirements of the community where it is located.

Representative projects include 123 Independence Drive TDM Plan in Menlo Park, 610 Walnut Street Office Development TDM Plan in Redwood City, and Greystar Main Street Mixed-use Development TDM Plan in Redwood City.
• Traffic Operation Analyses and Parking Studies for office, residential, retail, and school projects.

These studies included transportation operation analyses, site access and on-site circulation analyses, conducting surveys of existing parking demand, calculations of required parking supply for the proposed projects, and shared parking analyses. Representative projects include the 3700 Thomas Road Daycare in Santa Clara, 1001 Shoreline Boulevard Residential Development Parking Study in Mountain View, and 4856 El Camino Real Residential Development in Los Altos. • Travel Demand Forecasting Model Development and Applications:
 City of Sunnyvale General Plan Update; Sunnyvale, California. Prepared demographic data for model calibration and development.
 City of Palo Alto General Plan Update; Palo Alto, California. Prepared demographic data for model calibration and development and calculate intersection Level of Services.  C/CAG El Camino Real Corridor Preliminary Traffic Study. Coded highway networks for project alternatives. Estimated traffic demand and analyzed level of service for studied intersections.  2004/2005 C/CAG Model Update; San Mateo, California. Prepared highway network and demographic data for the updated travel demand model for San Mateo County, California.

Page G-8.88
Appendix B
Keyser Marston Associates – Housing Needs Assessment Scope Page G-8.89
2040 BANCROFT WAY, SUITE 302  Berkeley, CALIFORNIA 94704  PHONE: 415 398 3050  FAX: 415 397 5065 900b-1817-ICF.docx; jf
WWW.KEYSERMARSTON.COM 99900
ADVISORS IN:

REAL ESTATE

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

SAN FRANCISCO
A. JERRY KEYSER
TIMOTHY C. KELLY
DEBBIE M. KERN

DAVID DOEZEMA

KEVIN FEENEY

LOS ANGELES
KATHLEEN H. HEAD
JAMES A. RABE
GREGORY D. SOO-HOO
KEVIN E. ENGSTROM
JULIE L. ROMEY

TIM BRETZ

SAN DIEGO
PAUL C. MARRA
July 26, 2022
Kirsten Chapman
Project Manager
ICF
201 Mission Street, Suite 1500
San Francisco, CA 94105
Re: Proposed Scope of Services to Prepare a Housing Needs Assessment for the Parkline Project
Dear Kirsten:

Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. (“KMA”) is pleased to present the enclosed proposed scope of services to prepare a Housing Needs Assessment (“HNA”) for the City of Menlo Park addressing the proposed Parkline Project (“Project”). The Project is a mixed-use neighborhood with residential and office/research and development (R&D) buildings and supporting amenities. The Project would redevelop the Project site with the following uses:
 400 new rental residential units;
 Five new office and R&D buildings, an office amenity building, and community building totaling 1.1 million square feet, representing a one-to-one replacement of the portion of existing non-residential floor area proposed to be demolished;  Three existing buildings totaling approximately 284,000 square feet would be retained for continued R&D use;
 Landscaped publicly accessible open space, totaling 25 acres; and  New bicycle and pedestrian pathways.

KMA is exceptionally well qualified to prepare the HNA for the Project based on our broad expertise preparing housing impact studies and project-specific housing needs analyses. Our HNA experience encompasses a wide range of projects in Menlo Park, including the following:
 Menlo Gateway
 Facebook Campus
 Facebook Campus Expansion Project
Page G-8.90
Kirsten Chapman July 26, 2022
ICF Page 2
900b-1817-ICF.docx; jf
99900
 Menlo Flats
 Menlo Portal
 Menlo Uptown
 1350 Adams Court
 Commonwealth Building 3
 111 Independence Drive
 Willow Village Master Plan Project
The enclosed HNA scope of services includes preparation of an HNA using a methodology generally consistent with prior HNAs prepared for the City. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments regarding this proposed scope of services.

Sincerely,
KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC.

David Doezema
Attachment A: Scope of Services
Attachment B: KMA Rate Schedule
Page G-8.91
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 1
\\SF-FS2\wp\99\99900\900b-1801 to 1850\900b-1817a.docx
Attachment A
Scope of Services to Prepare a Housing Needs Assessment (HNA) for the Parkline Project
The following scope of services is for preparation of a Housing Needs Assessment (HNA) addressing the Parkline Project (“Project”). The HNA will address the following major housingrelated topics, to the extent possible:
1) Net impact on housing supply and housing need by income level considering:
a. Housing supply added by the Project;
b. Net impact on worker housing need from removal of existing commercial buildings from the Project site and replacement with new office / R&D buildings, with no net increase in non-residential floor area; and
c. Added worker housing need associated with off-site retail and other services to residents of the new residential units.
2) Estimated geographic distribution of housing needs by jurisdiction; and 3) Qualitative evaluation of potential influence on the regional housing market and potential to cause or contribute to the displacement of existing residents in nearby communities that are vulnerable to displacement.

These housing-related impacts are not required to be analyzed under CEQA but may be of interest to decision-makers and/or the public in evaluating the merits of the Project. The HNA scope and methodology will be generally consistent with HNAs for prior projects in Menlo Park.

As the Project adds residential uses but does not result in a net increase in non-residential floor area, the analysis of potential displacement impacts will be qualitative in nature, consistent with HNAs for previous projects in Menlo Park that were primarily residential in nature.

Task 1 – Project Initiation and Data Collection
The purpose of this task is to identify the availability of data necessary to complete the HNA, identify key analysis inputs and assumptions, and refine the approach to the assignment. As part of this task, KMA will:
(1) Provide a list of data needs to complete the HNA and work with the prime consultant and the City’s project team as necessary to gather the necessary data. (2) Meet with City staff, its consultants, and the project sponsor team to: (a) discuss data and analysis alternatives (b) review technical methodology and approach (c) discuss and agree on schedule.

Page G-8.92
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 2
\\SF-FS2\wp\99\99900\900b-1801 to 1850\900b-1817a.docx
Task 2 – Net impact on housing supply and housing need by income category KMA will quantify, by affordability level, the net impact on housing supply and housing demand associated with the Project. The analysis will address the following:
a. Housing Supply Addition by Income Level – The 400 residential units to be added to the housing supply by the Project will be summarized based on the income level(s) applicable to the Below Market Rate (BMR) affordable units and the estimated income level(s) applicable to the market rate units. The income level(s) for market rate units will be estimated based on an analysis of market rents for comparable units. b. Net Impact to Worker Housing Demand – The net impact to worker housing demand will be based on the estimated net change in employment levels from removal of the existing commercial buildings and construction of the new office / R&D space and office amenity building, combined with household size ratios developed from Census data. The net impact to housing demand by income level will be estimated using a methodology consistent with other recent HNAs prepared for the City. The analyses utilize a combination of Bureau of Labor Statistics, Census, and California Employment Development Department data to estimate the household incomes of workers. The analysis will address two scenarios regarding the mix of office / R&D and life sciences tenants since this mix may vary in response to future tenant needs. c. Housing Demand for Off-site Jobs Supported by Residential – Development of new residential units adds to the demand for services such as retail, restaurants, healthcare and education. KMA will prepare an analysis to estimate housing demand by income for workers associated with off-site services to residential units. The analysis will follow a series of steps linking the estimated incomes of residents living in the new units, their demand for goods and services, the number of jobs associated with providing these services, and the housing need by income level of the workers who fill those jobs.

Multiplier effects will be considered as part of the analysis. d. Net Housing Demand / Supply Effect – The net housing supply / demand effects will be computed by combining the findings of the above analyses, including each of the two scenarios regarding the mix of office / R&D and life sciences tenants.

Task 3 - Commuting and Geographic Distribution of Housing Supply / Demand Effects The prior task determines the total housing supply and demand effects irrespective of geography. In this task, the geographic distribution is estimated. The new housing units will be located in Menlo Park while the net change in worker housing needs will reflect the locations where workers live. Estimates of geographic distribution of housing demand effects will be Page G-8.93
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 3
\\SF-FS2\wp\99\99900\900b-1801 to 1850\900b-1817a.docx
based upon data on commute patterns available through a special tabulation of the U.S. Census and could also incorporate any available commute data for the existing non-residential space.

Task 4 – Relationship to Regional Housing Market and Potential to Contribute to Displacement
Lower income communities in the Bay Area have become increasingly vulnerable to displacement of existing residents. Employment growth, constrained housing production, and rising income inequality are among the factors that have contributed to increased displacement pressures, especially within lower income communities in locations accessible to employment centers where many households are housing-cost burdened. In this task, KMA will draw on the findings of the prior tasks and context materials assembled for prior HNAs prepared for other projects to provide a qualitative evaluation of the potential housing market effects.

The proposed qualitative discussion of housing market effects and displacement is more limited in scope than for past HNAs addressing projects that result in a significant increase in nonresidential uses. The proposed approach reflects the nature of the Project, which adds housing while maintaining the same amount of employment space.

Task 5 – Project Variant
The report will include a discussion of a Project variant with 600 residential units. KMA will quantify and summarize the net impact on housing demand and supply for the Project variant consistent with Tasks 2 and 3. For the Task 4 analysis of displacement impacts, a limited qualitative discussion of the variant will be provided.

Task 6 – Report Preparation
The methodology, data sources, results and implications of the HNA will be documented in a written report. This scope assumes one draft version of the report for review and one final report.

Task 7 – Responses to DEIR Comments
KMA anticipates assisting the City and the prime consultant in preparing responses to comments on the Draft EIR. KMA’s focus will be on comments that are directly related to the HNA. We have included a time and materials budget allowance for KMA to assist with preparation of responses to comments.

Page G-8.94
Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Page 4
\\SF-FS2\wp\99\99900\900b-1801 to 1850\900b-1817a.docx
Budget
KMA proposes to complete this scope of services for the Parkline Project on a time and materials basis for an amount not to exceed $45,000 per the estimate below. A copy of our current rate schedule is attached.

Task Budget
Estimate
Task 1 - Project Initiation and Data Collection $3,000
Task 2 – Net Housing Supply / Demand Effect (two scenarios) $20,000 Task 3 – Commuting and Geographic Distribution of Housing Effects $4,000 Task 4 – Relationship to Regional Housing Market and Displacement $5,000 Task 5 – Project Variant $2,000
Task 6 – Report (Draft and Final) $6,000
Task 7 – T&M Allowance for DEIR responses to comments $2,000 Reimbursable Expenses (data purchases) $3,000
Total $45,000
Page G-8.95

ATTACHMENT B
KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC.

PUBLIC SECTOR HOURLY RATES
______________________________________________
2022/2023
CHAIRMAN, PRESIDENT, MANAGING PRINCIPALS* $290.00
SENIOR PRINCIPALS* $280.00
PRINCIPALS* $260.00
MANAGERS* $235.00
SENIOR ASSOCIATES $195.00
ASSOCIATES $175.00
SENIOR ANALYSTS $160.00
ANALYSTS $140.00
TECHNICAL STAFF $100.00
ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF $85.00
Directly related job expenses not included in the above rates are: auto mileage, parking, air fares, hotels and motels, meals, car rentals, taxies, telephone calls, delivery, electronic data processing, graphics and printing. Directly related job expenses will be billed at 110% of cost.

Monthly billings for staff time and expenses incurred during the period will be payable within thirty (30) days of invoice date.
* Rates for individuals in these categories will be increased by 50% for time spent in court testimony.

Page G-8.96
Appendix C
Hexagon – Transportation Scope
Page G-8.97
July 22, 2022
ICF
201 Mission Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
Re: Proposal to Prepare a Transportation Impact Analysis for the Proposed Parkline Project in Menlo Park, CA.

Dear Ms. Garcia:

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. is pleased to submit this proposal to prepare a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) for the proposed Parkline project in Menlo Park, CA. The project site located at 333 Ravenswood Avenue is currently occupied by the existing SRI International campus. The project proposes to redevelop the approximately 63-acre site to include 400 new housing units (including affordable housing), 1.1 million s.f. of replacement office and R&D uses, and new community-oriented retail space. A variant project description increasing the residential component to include up to 600 units will also be evaluated.

Residential site access would be provided via driveways on Laurel Street and on Ravenswood Avenue. Access to the office and R&D land uses would be provided via driveways on Ravenswood Avenue and on Middlefield Road.

Scope of Services
The purpose of the transportation study is to satisfy the requirements of the City of Menlo Park, California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and the City/County Associations of Governments (C/CAG) Congestion Management Program (CMP). The transportation study will include a VMT analysis and an operational analysis of weekday AM and PM peak-hour traffic conditions. The operational analysis will determine the potential traffic adverse effects caused by the proposed project on up to 25 key intersections, 2 freeway segments, and 4 freeway ramps in the vicinity of the site.

CEQA Analysis

1. VMT Analysis. The project is located mostly within ½ mile of the Menlo Park Caltrain station but is not located in a low VMT zone. Therefore, aside from the retail land use, which can be exempted for its local-oriented nature, the office and residential land uses will require a VMT analysis. Hexagon will coordinate with City staff on the most appropriate approach to evaluate the project’s VMT for its office and residential land uses.

2. VMT Mitigation. If the VMT analysis identifies a significant VMT impact, Hexagon will work with City staff to identify the most appropriate mitigation strategies. It is envisioned that the City may need to work with the applicant team to develop the appropriate mitigation measures. Hexagon will provide technical support in reviewing documents and conducting any necessary analysis. This task assumes up to 20 hours of staff time. Work requiring considerably more effort will require additional budget authorization.

Page G-8.98
ICF
July 22, 2022