Manager to have supervisory responsibility for the performance, progress, and execution of the Services and represent CONSULTANT during the day -to-day performance of the Services. If circumstances cause the substitution of the CONSULTANT’s P roject Manager or any o ther of CONSULTANT’s key personnel for any reason, the appointment of a substitute Project Manager and the assignment of any key new or replacement personnel will be subject to the prior written approval of the CITY’s Project Manager. CONSULTANT, at CITY’s request, shall promptly remove CONSULTANT personnel who CITY finds do not perform the Services in an acceptable manner, are uncooperative, or present a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the Services or a threat to the safety of persons or property.
CITY’s Project Manager is Megha Bansal, Public Works Department, Engineering Services Division, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA , 94301, Telephone: (650) 329 -2693, Email:
[email protected]. CITY’s Project Manager will be CONSULTANT’s point of contact with respect to performance, progress and execution of the Services. CITY may designate an alternate Project Manager from time to time.
SECTION 14. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIALS . All work product, including without limitation, all writings, drawings, studies, sketches, photographs, plans, reports, specifications, computations, models, recordings, data, documents, and other materials and copyright interests developed under this Agreement, in any form or media, shall be and remain the exclusive property of CITY without restriction or limitation upon their use. CONSULTANT agrees that all copyrights which arise from cr eation of the work product pursuant to this Agreement are vested in CITY, and CONSULTANT hereby waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or other intellectual property rights in favor of CITY. Neither CONSULTANT nor its subcontractors, if any, shall make any of such work product available to any individual or organization without the prior written approval of the City Manager or designee. CONSULTANT makes no representation of the suitability of the work product for use in o r application to circumstances not contemplated by the Scope of Services.
SECTION 15. AUDITS. CONSULTANT agrees to permit CITY and its authorized representatives to audit, at any reasonable time during the term of this Agreement and for four (4) years from the date of final payment, CONSULTANT’s records pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement, including without limitation records demonstrating compliance with the requirements of Section 10 (Independent Contractor). CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain and retain accurate books and records in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles for at least four (4) years after the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement or the completion of any audit hereunder, whichever is later.
SECTION 16. INDEMNITY.
[Option A applies to the following design professionals pursuant to Civil Code Section 2782.8: architects; landscape architects; registered professional engineers and licensed professional land surveyors.] 16.1. To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and agents (each an “Indemnified Party”) from and against any and all third party demands, claims, or DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 124
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
liability of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss, including all costs and expenses of whatever nature including attorney’s fees, experts fees, court costs and disbursements (“Claims”) to the extent that such Claims arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents or contractors under this Agreement, regardless of whether or not it is caused in part b y an Indemnified Party. CITY will reimburse CONSULTANT for the proportionate percentage of defense costs exceeding CONSULTANT’s proportionate percentage of fault as determined by the final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction.
16.2. Notwithstanding the above, nothing in this Section 1 6 shall be construed to require CONSULTANT to indemnify an Indemnified Party from a Claim arising from the active negligence or willful misconduct of an Indemnified Party that is not contributed to by any act of, or by any omission to perform a duty imposed by law or agreement by, CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents or contractors under this Agreement.
16.3. The acceptance of CONSULTANT’s Services and duties by CITY shall not operate as a waiver of the right of indemnification. The provisions of this Section 16 shall survive the expiration or early termination of this Agreement.
SECTION 17. WAIVERS. No waiver of a condition or nonperformance of an obligation under this Agreement is effective unless it is in writing in accordance with Section 2 9.4 of this Agreement.
No delay or failure to require performance of any provision of this Agreement shall constitute a waiver of that provision as to that or any other instance. Any waiver granted shall apply solely to the specific instance expressly stated. No single or partial exercise of any right or remedy will preclude any other or further exercise of any right or remedy.
SECTION 18. INSURANCE.
18.1. CONSULTANT, at its sole cost and expense, shall obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, the insurance coverage described in Exhibit D, entitled “INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS”. CONSULTANT and its contractors, if any, shall obtain a policy endorsement naming CITY as an additional insured under any general liability or automobile policy or policies.
18.2. All insurance coverage required hereunder shall be provided through carriers with AM Best’s Key Rating Guide ratings of A -:VII or higher which are licensed or authorized to transact insurance business in the State of California. Any and all contractors of CONSULTANT retained to perform Services under this Agreement will obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, identical insurance coverage, naming CITY as an additional insured under such policies as required above.
18.3. Certificates evidencing such insurance shall be filed with CITY concurrently with the execution of this Agreement. The certificates will be subject to the approval of CITY’s Risk Manager and will contain an endorsement stating that the insurance is primary coverage and will not be canceled, or materially reduced in coverage or limits, by the insurer except after DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 125
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
filing with the Purchasing Manager thirty (30) days ’ prior written notice of the cancellation or modification. If the insurer cancels or modifies the insurance and provides less than thirty (30) days’ notice to CONSULTANT, CONSULTANT shall provide the Purchasing Manager written notice of the cancellation or modification within two (2) business days of the CONSULTANT’s receipt of such notice. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for ensuring that current certificates evidencing the insurance are provided to CITY’s Chief Procurement Officer during the entire term of this Agreement.
18.4. The procuring of such required policy or policies of insurance will not be construed to limit CONSULTANT’s liability hereunder nor to fulfill the indemnification provisions of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the policy or policies of insurance, CONSULTANT will be obligated for the full and total amount of any damage, injury, or loss caused by or directly arising as a result of the Services performed under this Agreement, including such damage, injury, or loss arising after the Agreement is terminated or the term has expired.
SECTION 19. TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF AGREEMENT OR SERVICES.
19.1. The City Manager may suspend the performance of the Services, in whole or in part, or terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, by giving ten (10) days prior written notice thereof to CONSULTANT. If CONSULTANT fails to per form any of its material obligations under this Agreement, in addition to all other remedies provided under this Agreement or at law, the City Manager may terminate this Agreement sooner upon written notice of termination. Upon receipt of any notice of suspension or termination, CONSULTANT will discontinue its performance of the Services on the effective date in the notice of suspension or termination.
19.2. In event of suspension or termination, CONSULTANT will deliver to the City Manager on or before the effective date in the notice of suspension or termination, any and all work product, as detailed in Section 14 (Ownership of Materials ), whether or not completed, prepared by CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, in the performance of this Agreement. Such work product is the property of CITY, as detailed in Section 14 (Ownership of Materials).
19.3. In event of suspension or termination, CONSULTANT will be paid for the Services rendered and work products delivered to CITY in accordance with the Scope of Services up to the effective date in the notice of suspension or termination; provided, however, if this Agreement is suspended or terminated on account of a default by CONSULTANT, CITY will be obligated to compensate CONSULTANT only for that portion of CONSULTANT’s Services provided in material conformity with this Agreement as such determination is made by the City Manager acting in the reasonable exercise of his/her discretion . The following Sections wil l survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement: 14, 15, 16, 17, 19.2, 19.3, 19.4, 20, 25, 27, 28, 29 and 30.
19.4. No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY will operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Agreement, unless made in accordance with Section 17 (Waivers).
DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 126
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
SECTION 20. NOTICES.
All notices hereunder will be given in writing and mailed, postage prepaid, by certified mail, addressed as follows:
To CITY: Office of the City Clerk
City of Palo Alto
Post Office Box 10250
Palo Alto, CA 94303
With a copy to the Purchasing Manager
To CONSULTANT: Attention of the Project Manager at the address of CONSULTANT recited on the first page of this Agreement.
CONSULTANT shall provide written notice to CITY of any change of address.
SECTION 21. CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
21.1. In executing this Agreement, CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has no interest, and will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the Services.
21.2. CONSULTANT further covenants that, in the performance of this Agreement, it will not employ subcontractors or other persons or parties having such an interest.
CONSULTANT certifies that no person who has or will have any financial interest under this Agreement is an officer or employee of CITY; this provision will be interpreted in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Government Code of the State of California, as amended from time to time . CONSULTANT agrees to notify CITY if any conflict arises.
21.3. If the CONSULTANT meets the definition of a “Consultant” as defined by the Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission, CONSULTANT will file the appropriate financial disclosure documents required by the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Political Reform Act of 1974, as amended from time to time.
SECTION 22. NONDISCRIMINATION; COMPLIANCE WITH ADA.
22.1. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 2.30.510, as amended from time to time, CONSULTANT certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person due to that person’s race, skin color, gender, gender identity, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, pregnancy, genetic information or condition, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. CONSULTANT acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 127
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and agrees to meet all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment.
22.2. CONSULTANT understands and agrees that pursuant to the Americans Disabilities Act (“ADA”), programs, services and other activities provided by a public entity to the public, whether directly or through a contractor or subcontractor, are required to be accessible to the disabled public. CONSULTANT will provide the Services specified in this Agreement in a manner that complies with the ADA and any other applicable federal, state and local disability rights laws and regulations , as amended from time to time . CONSULTANT will not discriminate against persons with disabilities in the provision of services, benefits or activities provided under this Agreement.
SECTION 23. ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED PURCHASING AND ZERO WASTE REQUIREMENTS. CONSULTANT shall comply with t he CITY’s Environmentally Preferred Purchasing policies which are available at CITY’s Purchasing Department, hereby incorporated by reference and as amended from time to time. CONSULTANT shall comply with waste reduction, reuse, recycling and disposal requirements of CITY’s Zero Waste Program. Zero Waste best practices include , first, minimizing and reducing waste; second, reusing waste ; and, third, recycling or composting waste. In particular, CONSULTANT shall comply with the following Zero Waste requirements:
(a) All printed materials provided by CONSULTANT to CITY generated from a personal computer and printer including but not limited to, proposals, quotes, invoices, reports, and public education materials, shall be double -sided and printed on a minimum of 30% or greater post - consumer content paper, unless otherwi se approved by CITY’s Project Manager. Any submitted materials printed by a professional printing company shall be a minimum of 30% or greater post- consumer material and printed with vegetable-based inks. (b) Goods purchased by C ONSULTANT on behalf of CITY shall be purchased in accordance with CITY’s Environmental Purchasing Policy including but not limited to Extended Producer Responsibility requirements for products and packaging. A copy of this policy is on file at the Purchasing Department’s office.
(c) Reusable/returnable pallets shall be taken back by CONSULTANT, at no additional cost to CITY, for reuse or recycling. C ONSULTANT shall provide documentation from the facility accepting the pallets to verify that pallets are not being disposed.
SECTION 24. COMPLIANCE WITH PALO ALTO MINIMUM WAGE ORDINANCE . CONSULTANT shall comply with all requirements of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 4.62 (Citywide Minimum Wage), as amended from time to time. In particular, for any employee otherwise entitled to the State minimum wage, who performs at least two (2) hours of work in a calendar week within the geographic boundaries of the City, CONSULTANT shall pay such employees no less than the minimum wage set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 4.62.030 for each hour worked within the geographic boundaries of the City of Palo Alto. In addition, CONSULTANT shall post notices regarding the Palo Alto Minimum Wage Ordinance in accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 4.62.060.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 128
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
SECTION 25. NON -APPROPRIATION. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code, as amended from time to time.
This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that funds are not appropriated for the following fiscal year, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a p ortion of the fiscal year and funds for this Agreement are no longer available. This Section shall take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement.
SECTION 26. PREVAILING WAGES AND DIR REGISTRATION FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS.
26.1. This Project is subject to prevailing wages and related requirements as a “public works” under California Labor Code Sections 1720 et seq. and related regulations.
CONSULTANT is required to pay general prevailing wages as defined in California Labor Code Section 1773.1 and Subchapter 3, Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations Section 16000 et seq., as amended from time to time. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1773, the CITY has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of worker needed to execute the contract for this Project from the State of Californi a Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”). Copies of these rates may be obtained at the CITY’s Purchasing Department office. The general prevailing wage rates are also available at the DIR, Division of Labor Statistics and Research, web site (see e.g. http://www.dir.ca.gov/DLSR/PWD/index.htm) as amended from time to time. CONSULTANT shall post a copy of the general prevailing wage rates at all Project job sites and shall pay the adopted prev ailing wage rates as a minimum. CONSULTANT shall comply with all applicable provisions of Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1 of the California Labor Code (Labor Code Section 1720 et seq.), including but not limited to Sections 1725.5, 1771, 1771.1, 1771.4, 1773.2, 1774, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1782, 1810, 1813 and 1815, and all applicable implementing regulations, including but not limited to Subchapter 3, Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations Section 16000 et seq. (8 CCR Section 16000 et seq.) , as amended from time to time . CONSULTANT shall comply with the requirements of Exhibit E , entitled “ DIR REGISTRATION FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS”, for any contract for public works construction, alteration, demolition, repair or maintenance, including but not limited to the obligation s to register with , and furnish certified payroll records directly to, DIR.
SECTION 27. CLAIMS PROCEDURE FOR “9204 PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS” . For purposes of this Section 27, a “9204 Public Works Project” means the erection, construction, alteration, repair, or improvement of any public structure, building, road, or other public improvement of any kind. (Cal. Pub. Cont. Code § 9204.) Per California Public Contract Code Section 9204, for Public Works Projects, certain claims procedures shall apply, as set forth in Exhibit F, entitled “Claims for Public Contract Code Section 9204 Public Works Projects”.
This Project is a 9204 Public Works Project and is required to comply with the claims procedures set forth in Exhibit F, entitled “Claims for Public Contract Code Section 9204 Public Works Projects”.
SECTION 28. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 129
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
28.1. In the performance of this Agreement, CONSULTANT may have access to CITY’s Confidential Information (defined below). CONSULTANT will hold Confidential Information in strict confidence, not disclose it to any third party, an d will use it only for the performance of its obligations to CITY under this Agreement and for no other purpose. CONSULTANT will maintain reasonable and appropriate administrative, technical and physical safeguards to ensure the security, confidentiality a nd integrity of the Confidential Information. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CONSULTANT may disclose Confidential Information to its employees, agents and subcontractors, if any, to the extent they have a need to know in order to perform CONSULTANT’s obligations to CITY under this Agreement and for no other purpose, provided that the CONSULTANT informs them of, and requires them to follow, the confidentiality and security obligations of this Agreement.
28.2. “Confidential Information” means all data, information (including without limitation “Personal Information” about a California resident as defined in Civil Code Section 1798 et seq. , as amended from time to time) and materials, in any form or media, tangible or intangible, provided or otherwise made available to CONSULTANT by CITY, directly or indirectly, pursuant to this Agreement. Confidential Information excludes information that CONSULTANT can show by appropriate documentation: (i ) was publicly known at the time it was provided or has subsequently become publicly known other than by a breach of this Agreement; (ii) was rightfully in CONSULTANT’s possession free of any obligation of confidence prior to receipt of Confidential Information; (iii) is rightfully obtained by CONSULTANT from a third party without breach of any confidentiality obligation; (iv) is independently developed by employees of CONSULTANT without any use of or access to the Confidential Information; or (v) CONSULTAN T has written consent to disclose signed by an authorized representative of CITY.
28.3. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CONSULTANT may disclose Confidential Information to the extent required by order of a court of competent jurisdiction or governmental body, provided that CONSULTANT will notify CITY in writing of such order immediately upon receipt and prior to any such disclosure (unless CONSULTANT is prohibited by law from doing so), to give CITY an opportunity to oppose or otherwise respond to such order.
28.4. CONSULTANT will notify City promptly upon learning of any breach in the security of its systems or unauthorized disclosure of, or access to, Confidential Information in its possession or control, and if such Confidential Information consists o f Personal Information, CONSULTANT will provide information to CITY sufficient to meet the notice requirements of Civil Code Section 1798 et seq., as applicable, as amended from time to time.
28.5. Prior to or upon termination or expiration of this Agree ment, CONSULTANT will honor any request from the CITY to return or securely destroy all copies of Confidential Information. All Confidential Information is and will remain the property of the CITY and nothing contained in this Agreement grants or confers a ny rights to such Confidential Information on CONSULTANT.
28.6. If selected in Section 30 (Exhibits), this Agreement is also subject to the DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 130
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
terms and conditions of the Information Privacy Policy and Cybersecurity Terms and Conditions.
SECTION 29. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
29.1. This Agreement will be governed by California law, without regard to its conflict of law provisions.
29.2. In the event that an action is brought, the parties agree that trial of such action will be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Santa Clara, State of California.
29.3. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the provisions of this Agreement may recover its reasonable costs and attorneys ’ fees expended in connection with that action. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover an amount equal to the fair market value of legal services provided by attorneys employed by it as well as any attorneys’ fees paid to third parties.
29.4. This Agreement, including all exhibits, constitutes the entire and integrated agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement, and supersedes all prior agreements, negotiations, representations, statements and undertakings, either oral or written. This Agreement may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the authorized representatives of the parties and approved as required under Palo Alto Municipal Code, as amended from time to time.
29.5. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement is void or unenforceable, the unaffected provisions of this Agreement will remain in full force and effect.
29.6. In the event of a conflict between the terms of this Agreement and the exhibits hereto (per Section 30) or CONSULTANT’s proposal (if any), the Agreement shall control.
In the event of a conflict between the exhibits hereto and CONSULTANT’s proposal (if any), the exhibits shall control.
29.7. The provisions of all checked boxes in this Agreement shall apply to this Agreement; the provisions of any unchecked boxes shall not apply to this Agreement.
29.8. All section headings contained in this Agreement are for convenience and reference only and are not intended to define or limit the scope of any provision of this Agreement.
29.9. This Agreement may be signed in multiple counterparts, which, when executed by the authorized representatives of the parties, shall together constitute a single binding agreement.
SECTION 30. EXHIBITS. Each of the following exhibits, if the check box for such exhibit is selected DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 131
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
below, is hereby attached and incorporated into this Agreement by reference as though fully set forth herein:
EXHIBIT A: SCOPE OF SERVICES
EXHIBIT A-1 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TASK ORDER
EXHIBIT B: SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
EXHIBIT C: COMPENSATION
EXHIBIT C-1: SCHEDULE OF RATES
EXHIBIT D: INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
EXHIBIT E: DIR REGISTRATION FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS
EXHIBIT F: CLAIMS FOR PUBLIC CONTRACT CODE SECTION 9204 PUBLIC
WORKS PROJECTS
THIS AGREEMENT IS NOT COMPLETE UNLESS ALL SELECTED EXHIBITS ARE ATTACHED.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 132
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
CONTRACT NO. C22182372 SIGNATURE PAGE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Agreement as of the date first above written.
CITY OF PALO ALTO
____________________________
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________
City Attorney or Designee
CSW/STUBER-STROEH ENGINEERING
GROUP INC.
Officer 1
By:__________________________________
Name:_______________________________
Title:________________________________
Officer 2
By:__________________________________
Name:_______________________________
Title:________________________________
DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4 CEO/President
Robert Stevens, President
CFO
Linda Schmid, CFO
10.a
Packet Pg. 133
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF SERVICES
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
CONSULTANT shall provide the Services detailed in this Exhibit A, entitled “SCOPE OF SERVICES”.
The CITY intends to repurpose University Avenue Streetscape between Alma Street and Middlefield Road to facilitate people -centric activities and community programming using an urban design approach considering the architectural setting, landscape design, management, and user experience of the public spaces in the streetscape project area.
The CITY is awarding the Project’s Phase 1 scope of services under this Agreement as detailed below. The scope of services of any future phases (beyond Phase 1) as described in the Request for Proposals, if any such future phases are to proceed, would be developed and refined through future contract amendments. The CONSULTANT shall complete the following tasks:
PHASE 1 – UNIVERSITY AVENUE CONCEPTUAL PLAN:
Phase 1 Scope of Services includes the following tasks which will establish a preferred development plan for University Avenue through a public outreach process.
Task 1: Goals and Objectives
1. At project initiation, the CONSULTANT shall attend a kick -off meeting with CITY staff to review the project scope and general field conditions.
The CONSULTANT shall provide a meeting agenda, schedule, and provide a summary of comments in an electronic format. An electronic format typically means Adobe Acrobat (PDF) document including the files in their native format.
2. The CONSULTANT shall work with CITY staff to design an engagement plan tailored to the community. The plan should identify the milestones and tasks for a successful outreach process. It should identify channels to share information about the project, possible events linkages or methods to distribute flyers. The plan should include strategies for reaching desired, but hard to access, audiences identified by the staff. To help refine this process, the CONSULTANT should organize two groups to hold walking tours and coordination meetings to focus on the planning effort. These groups would include:
A. Technical Working Gr oup: This group would include CITY staff including public works, economic development, planning department, Office of Transportation, and the police and fire departments as well as utility companies. The discussion would focus on alternatives to the corridor that are operationally feasible.
B. University Avenue Working Group : This would include a focus group of representatives from the business community (block ambassadors), residents, and bicycle advocates that would help to refine the discussion on g oals and objectives for the study and the future of University Avenue. This group would DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 134
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
support development of the presentations to commissions as well as the greater community.
At the conclusion of these meetings, the CONSULTANT should have an understanding of the community’s goals, which will help refine the data collection exercise.
The CONSULTANT shall provide a draft version and, after incorporating any CITY - requested feedback, a final version of the engagement plan in an electronic format.
Task 2: Data Collection. The CONSULTANT shall collect data as well as research best practices to develop an existing conditions assessment of University Avenue between Middlefield Road and Alma Avenue. This would include the following tasks:
A. Existing Conditio ns Mapping : The CONSULTANT shall supplement existing aerial photography and LIDAR data for University Avenue with supplemental field data of sufficient accuracy to illustrate locations of curbs and gutters, sidewalks, utility appurtenances, lights, traffic signals, striping, signage, buildings, street furnishings, and trees. This will include data collection approximately 100 feet down each cross street.
The CONSULTANT shall plot the locations of utilities based on record information supplemented by field investigation including the direction of flow of gravity systems.
This document will serve as the basis for investigation of alternatives for University Avenue.
The CONSULTANT shall develop the existing conditions mapping in AutoCAD 2019 format.
CONSULTANT shall provide five (5) hard copy sets of the field survey (1 Draft Set/1 Final set upon CITY approval of Survey) – 24” x 36” sheets of consecutive plan view of roadway including sidewalks and building outlines and all inter sections of University Avenue from Alma Street to Middlefield Road at a scale of 1” = 20’.
B. Retail: The CONSULTANT shall complete an assessment of the retail establishments within the project area to determine the name and type of retail for each property. The CONSULTANT shall identify if the property is vacant and if possible, the duration of vacancy.
The CONSULTANT shall present this information in both a narrative and exhibit electronic formats.
C. Traffic: The CONSULTANT shall provide a summary of “Main Street” transportation options related to road closure and parking implemented in other communities, including those related to other “slow streets” programs enacted during the Covid -19 pandemic.
The CONSULANT shall also provide a summary of how emerging trends such as automated vehicles and delivery devices, shared mobility, increased micro mobility usage, and curbside management implementation may influence future demand for transportation options on University Avenue.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 135
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
In a ddition to referencing any available data, the CONSULTANT shall coordinate the collection of new 7-day automated tube counts identifying traffic volumes and speeds at up to six roadway segment locations anticipated to include at least one location each on University Avenue, Lytton Avenue, and Hamilton Avenue in the project area. Newly collected data should be compared to historical data to identify growth trends as well as a qualitative understanding of effects of the Covid-19 pandemic on traffic volumes in the downtown Palo Alto area. The CONSULTANT shall also coordinate collection of parking occupancy data on University Avenue within the project limits reflecting up to six hours within peak two peak periods.
Based on these assessments, the CONSULTANT shall complete a qualitative assessment of existing transportation conditions such as parking and travel delay along University Avenue. The assessment will serve as a baseline of comparison for alternatives to be developed in future phases.
The CONSULTANT shall summarize this information in a report presented in an electronic format.
D. Future of Transportation : The CONSULTANT shall hold a study session focused on emerging demographic, social and technological trends in Palo Alto and Santa Clara County that impact transportation. The CONSULTANT shall use their TrendLab+ tool to test the effects of emerging demographic, social and technological trends on mobility over the next 1, 5 and 10 years. This analysis shall include the ability to test the impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic and its economic consequences on mobility.
The CONSULTANT shall summarize this information in a presentation to the CITY using an online meeting platform.
E. Placemaking: The CONSULTANT shall capture the attributes of University Avenue that make it unique as well as those elements that can be leveraged in the streetscape design. Visual landmarks and architectural characteristic of setting Existing vocabulary of site furnishings (public or private) Retail interface including overhangs into the right of way Special attributes of each block – dog-friendly, bike parking, performance areas, gathering spaces, informational nodes, and art elements Significant signage with each block and the use of outdoor spaces Pedestrian connections to parking areas
The CONSULTANT shall summarize this information in a report presented in an electronic format.
F. Arborist Report. The CONSULANT’s certified arborist shall conduct a field survey of the trees within and adjacent University Avenue that might be affected by project construction. The field survey shall consist of the following: identify tree species; determine if the tree is subject to Palo Alto’s tree preservation ordinance and CITY’s Tree DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 136
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
Technical Manual; measure the diameter; and evaluate its health.
The CONSULTANT shall summarize the information on a map and in a report presented in an electronic format.
Task 3: Alternatives for University Avenue. Based upon feedback received from various engagement groups and data collection, the CONSULTANT shall develop at least three alternative streetscape designs for University Avenue. The CONSULTANT shall use an urban design approach that emphasizes consideration of the architectural setting, landscape design, management, and user experience of the public spaces in the streetscape project area.
The alternatives shall each have a brand developed through streetscape components that create University Avenue as a destination for the community and potentially the region. The alternates shall respond to the nuanced attributes of each block. Each alternative shall include an assessment of the impact to traffic, parking, retail environment, deliveries, mai ntenance, multi- modal access, and safety. The CONSULTANT shall use these metrics to assign a benefit and cost to each option. For each alternative, the CONSULTANT shall develop a full color plan view, illustrative sections, and imagery of key elements as necessary to clearly describe the character of each alternative.
Because traffic and parking are likely to be concerns, the CONSULTANT shall complete both a qualitative and quantitative assessment of each alternative. The CONSULTANT shall review each alternative for operational function and safety at the key intersections between Alma Avenue and Middlefield Road. In addition, the CONSULTANT shall use the traffic model created to identify effects of partial or full -time roadway closures of University Avenue on Lytton and Hamilton Avenues.
The goal would be to develop a Preferred Community Plan Line alternative to advance to the design phase. The Preferred Community Plan Line alternative shall be developed through outreach meetings and input outlined in Task 5. It is possible that the project includes a near term alternative as well as a long -term plan for University Avenue that could be implemented if transportation and social changes continue as anticipated.
Task 4: Costs, Funding, and Assessment Planning. For each of the alternatives including the Community Preferred Plan Line alignment , the CONSULTANT shall develop a capital cost to construct improvements as well as work with CITY staff to identify maintenance assumptions and operating cost associated with proposed improvements including reserves based on amenity life cycles. The cost estimate shall include all relevant costs, including design, utility relocations, utility fees for services, construction contract, construction manager, escalation, and appropriate contingencies.
The CONSULTANT shall work with CITY staff to develop a funding plan to develop the Preferred Community Plan using local, County, State, and Federal sources. Additionally, the CONSULTANT shall develop a preliminary budget for an assessment district for funding and/or operation of the Preferred Community Plan by the property owners fronting the improvement area . The DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 137
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
CONSULTANT shall prepare assessment analysis models to allocate these costs for businesses/property owners that benefit from the expanded space as follows:
A. Recommend and develop allocation of capital costs to property owners through at least two potential assessment district methodologies, assuming a 20 -year debt service on borrowing for the capital costs. CITY will provide relevant parcel and building data for use in cost allocation.
B. Develop a model to allocate ongoing operating costs for maintenance to businesses using the newly activated University Avenue public space. The model shall include space available for constant use and, as applicable, street space made available through potential regular weekend closures.
The CONSULTANT shall support the CITY in discussions of the funding and assessment planning with business and property owners using the outreach process as outlined in Task 5. This process shall occur prior to presenting a draft plan to the Planning and Transportation Commission and CITY Council for review.
Task 5: Outreach. The CONSULTANT shall use a combination of electronic and in -person meetings to provide information and solicit feedback regarding the streetscape design and funding options. The CONSULTANT shall build on the engagement strategy defined in Task 1 with the support of the University and Technical Working Groups.
A. Website, Branding and Social Media. The CONSULTANT shall initiate the outreach program and develop a social media plan and calendar based on Palo Alto’s current preferred communication channels for specific audiences. All the outreach information should be on CITY’s website that will be directed to a project page on the CONSULTANT’s hosted website, where the community can take surveys/polls, review frequently asked questions, and stay abreast of the project evolution. T he website shall promote a look that matches all marketing collateral related to the project to assist with recognition.
B. Meetings. The CONSULTANT shall conduct in -person or virtual outreach meetings per City’s input. For in-person outreach, the following meetings are anticipated.
Meeting Name External Outreach Internal Outreach
Goal Setting University Working Group Walking Tour Technical Working Group Opportunities,
Constraints, and ideas
University Working Group
University Business Improvement District
Community Meeting
Technical Working Group
Concept Alternatives University Working Group Walking Tour University Business Improvement District
Planning & Transportation Commission
Ped and Bike Commission
Community Meeting
Technical Working Group
Recommended
Alternative
University Working Group
Planning & Transportation Commission
City Council
DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 138
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
C. Pop-ups. To further advertise and solicit community input , the CONSULTANT shall plan to also engage the community where they are already gathering with booths at Farmers Market or a pop up along University Ave. The CONSULTANT shall solicit input at booths and direct public to website and public meeting.
D. Notices. CONSULTANT shall prepare all outreach, notices and meeting and presentation materials for stakeholder, community, and public meetings. Each meeting should be scheduled for four hours excluding travel time.
E. Facilitation. CONSULTANT shall provide meeting facilitators with expertise in engaging with multiple stakeholder groups with divergent interests.
Phase 1 - Tasks 1 to 5 Deliverables: The scope of work, above, notes deliverables included in the individual task. The following is a summary of the CONSULTANT’s deliverables to the CITY.
1. University Avenue mission statement documenting goal and objectives presented in a memorandum.
2. Base mapping of University Avenue presented as a drawing.
3. Traffic and parking data for the downtown presented as a report.
4. Retail types and occupancy survey presented as a report.
5. Potential alternatives for University Avenue illustrated in plans, illustrations, and narrative format.
6. Preferred Community Plan Line alternative for University Avenue – potentially illustrating development over time illustrated in plans, illustrations, and narrative format.
7. Capital and operational costs as well as funding strategies presented in a report format.
8. Two potential assessment district models for the Preferred Community Plan Line presented in a report format.
9. Website for the project.
10. Public meeting agendas, materials, and minutes including PowerPoint presentations, plans, handouts, reports, and boards.
1. ADDITIONAL SERVICES: SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION, PER SECTION 4 (NOT TO
EXCEED COMPENSATION) OF THIS AGREEMENT
Additional Services, as defined in Section 4 (Not to Exceed Compensation) of this Agreement, may be required by City. Additional Services are subject to project manager approval via Task Order prior to starting on w ork, as detailed in said Section 4 . Examples of potential Additional Services are as follows:
Additional meetings and associated presentation materials with ARB, Council, public, and other coordination groups.
Additional plan drawings and revisions
2. INFORMATION AND SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
The CITY will provide the following during the design phase:
DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 139
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
Base Map from GIS for use in identifying City-Owned Utility Information; Survey and as -built information from the 2018 Upgrade Downtown Project (University Avenue from High Street to Webster Street)
AutoCAD title block
CITY Standard construction details and technical specifications for irrigation work, asphalt, concrete, sidewalk, curb and gutter, tree planting, landscaping and median details in AutoCAD
CITY staff shall assist in obtaining design review documents from CITY staff for various Departments.
CITY’s Draft Downtown Design Guidelines for reference purposes. Downtown parking data.
Tax revenue for downtown retail businesses pre COVID-19 as well as pre, during, and post 2020 University Avenue closur e. This data shall be general and not specific to any one business along the corridor to maintain confidentiality.
CONSULTANT is responsible for reviewing and verifying all supplied information.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 140
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
EXHIBIT A-1
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TASK ORDER
CONSULTANT shall perform the Services detailed below in accordance with all the terms and conditions of the Agreement referenced in Item 1A below. All exhibits referenced in Item 8 are incorporated into this Task Order by this reference. CONSULTANT shall furnish the necessary facilities, professional, technical and supporting personnel required by this Task Order as described below.
CONTRACT NO.
OR PURCHASE ORDER REQUISITION NO. (AS APPLICABLE)
1A. MASTER AGREEMENT NO. (MAY BE SAME AS CONTRACT / P.O. NO. ABOVE):
1B. TASK ORDER NO.:
2. CONSULTANT NAME:
3. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE: START: COMPLETION:
4 TOTAL TASK ORDER PRICE: $__________________
BALANCE REMAINING IN MASTER AGREEMENT/CONTRACT $_______________
5. BUDGET CODE_______________
COST CENTER________________
COST ELEMENT______________
WBS/CIP__________
PHASE__________
6. CITY PROJECT MANAGER’S NAME & DEPARTMENT:_____________________________________
7. DESCRIPTION OF SCOPE OF SERVICES (Attachment A)
MUST INCLUDE:
SERVICES AND DELIVERABLES TO BE PROVIDED
SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
MAXIMUM COMPENSATION AMOUNT AND RATE SCHEDULE (as applicable) REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES, if any (with “not to exceed” amount)
8. ATTACHMENTS: A: Task Order Scope of Services B (if any): _____________________________
I hereby authorize the performance of the work
described in this Task Order.
APPROVED:
CITY OF PALO ALTO
BY:____________________________________
Name __________________________________
Title___________________________________
Date ___________________________________
I hereby acknowledge receipt and acceptance of this
Task Order and warrant that I have authority to sign
on behalf of Consultant.
APPROVED:
COMPANY NAME: ______________________
BY:____________________________________
Name __________________________________
Title___________________________________
Date ___________________________________
DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 141
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
EXHIBIT B
SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
CONSULTANT shall perform the Services so as to complete each milestone within the number of days/weeks specified below. The time to complete each milestone may be increased or decreased by mutual written agreement of the Project Managers for CONSULTANT and CITY so long as all work is completed within the term of the Agreement. CONSULTANT shall provi de a detailed schedule of work consistent with the schedule below within 2 weeks of receipt of the notice to proceed (“NTP”) from the CITY.
Milestone Completion
Number of Days/ Weeks (as specific below)
From NTP
Goals and Objectives 45 working days
Completion of Data Collection 110 working days
Concept Alternatives 170 working days
Costs, Funding, and Assessment Planning 200 working days Refined Alternatives 240 working days
Final Presentation to City Council 270 working days
Optional Schedule of Performance Provision for On-Call or Additional Services Agreements. (This provision only applies if checked and only applies to on -call agreements per Section 1 or agreements with Additional Services per Section 4.)
The schedule of performance shall be as provided in the approved Task Order, as detailed in Section 1 (Scope of Services) in the case of on-call Services, or as detailed in Section 4 in the case of Additional Services, provided in all cases that the schedule of performance shall fall within the term as provided in Section 2 (Term) of this Agreement.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 142
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
EXHIBIT C
COMPENSATION
CITY agrees to compensate CONSULTANT for Services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and as set forth in the budget schedule below. Compensation shall be calculated based on the rate schedule attached as Exhibit C-1 up to the not to exceed budget amount for each task set forth below.
CITY’s Project Manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts between any of the tasks or categories listed below , provided that the total compensation for the Services, including any specified reimbursable expenses, and the total compensation for Additional Services (if any, per Section 4 of the Agreement) do not exceed the amounts set forth in Section 4 of this Agreement.
CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Services, any specified reimbursable expenses, and Additional Services (if any, per Section 4) , within this/these amount(s). Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth in this Agreement shall be at no cost to the CITY.
BUDGET SCHEDULE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT
Task 1: Goals and Objectives $7,630
Task 2: Data Collection $49,960
Task 3: Alternatives for University Avenue $46,520
Task 4: Costs, Funding, and Assessment Planning $11,116 Task 5: Outreach $32,580
Subtotal for Services $147,806
Reimbursable Expense $2,060
Total for Services and Reimbursable Expenses $149,866
Additional Services (if any, per Section 4) $14,986
Maximum Total Compensation $164,852
REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES
CONSULTANT’S ordinary business expenses, such as administrative, overhead, administrative support time/overtime, information systems, software and hardware, photocopying, telecommunications (telephone, internet), in-house printing, insurance and DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 143
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
other ordinary business expenses, are included within the scope of payment for Services and are not reimbursable expenses hereunder.
Reimbursable expenses, if any are specified as reimbursable under this section, will be reimbursed at actual cost. The expenses (b y type, e.g. travel) for which CONSULTANT will be reimbursed are Travel and Printing up to the not-to-exceed amount of $2,060.00.
Travel outside the San Francisco Bay Area, including transportation and meals, if specified as reimbursable, will be reimbur sed at actual cost subject to the City of Palo Alto’s policy for reimbursement of travel and meal expenses.
All requests for reimbursement of expenses, if any are specified as reimbursable under this section, shall be accompanied by appropriate backup documentation and information.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 144
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
EXHIBIT C-1
SCHEDULE OF RATES
CONSULTANT’s and SUBCONSULTANT’s schedules of rates are as follows:
CSW|ST2 Billing Rates (CONSULTANT)
ENGINEERING SERVICES HOURLY RATES
TITLE RATE PER HOUR
Senior Engineer $ 180.00
Engineer I, II, III $ 129.00, $ 157.00, $ 175.00
Technician $ 103.00
SURVEY SERVICES HOURLY RATES
OTHER PROFESSIONAL RATES
TITLE RATE PER HOUR
Principal $235.00
Associate Principal $ 221.00
Project Manager $ 210.00
Construction Manager $ 211.00
Resident Engineer $ 155.00
Technical Writer $ 124.00
Graphic Illustrator $ 118.00
Project Assistant $ 91.00
TITLE RATE PER HOUR
Senior Surveyor $180.00
Surveyor I, II, III $ 129.00, $ 157.00, $ 175.00
Technician $ 118.00
Two Person Survey Party $ 283.00
One Person Survey Party $ 201.00
Aerial Drone Surveyor $ 201.00
DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 145
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
Fehr and Peers Billing Rates (SUBCONSULTANT)
TITLE RATE PER HOUR
Principal $325
Senior Associate $255
Associate $245
Senior Engineer/Planner $190
Engineer/Planner $165
Senior Engineering Technician $170
Senior Project Accountant $165
Senior Project Coordinator $145
Project Coordinator $135
Technician $155
Intern $115
Gates and Associates Billing Rates (SUBCONSULTANT)
TITLE RATE PER HOUR
Partner
Principal
Associate Principal
Senior Associate
Job Captain
Irrigation Design Technician
Sr. Visual Communications Designer
Community Outreach Facilitator
Marketing Coordinator
Administrative/Drafter
$200.00
$185.00
$175.00
$145.00
$135.00
$195.00
$145.00
$150.00
$125.00
$120.00
DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 146
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
LSA Billing Rates (SUBCONSULTANT)
TITLE RATE PER HOUR
Principal
Project Manager
Associate Biologist
Senior Botanist
Associate Cultural Resources
Archeologist
Principal Noise
Senior Planner Noise
Transportation
GIS/ Graphics
Technical Editor
$250.00
$170.00
$165.00
$120.00
$140.00
$85.00
$245.00
$145.00
$200.00
$150.00
$125.00
DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 147
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
EXHIBIT D
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
CONSULTANTS TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (CITY), AT THEIR SOLE EXPENSE, SHALL FOR THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT OBTAIN
AND MAINTAIN INSURANCE IN THE AMOUNTS FOR THE COVERAGE SPECIFIED BELOW, AFFORDED BY COMPANIES WITH AM BEST’S KEY RATING OF A -:VII, OR HIGHER, LICENSED OR AUT HORIZED TO TRANSACT INSURANCE BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
AWARD IS CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH CITY’S INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS AS SPECIFIED HEREIN.
REQUIRED TYPE OF COVERAGE REQUIREMENT
MINIMUM LIMITS
EACH
OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE
YES
YES
WORKER’S COMPENSATION EMPLOYER’S
LIABILITY
STATUTORY
STATUTORY STATUTORY STATUTORY
YES
GENERAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING
PERSONAL INJURY, BROAD FORM
PROPERTY DAMAGE BLANKET
CONTRACTUAL, AND FIRE LEGAL LIABILITY
BODILY INJURY
PROPERTY DAMAGE
BODILY INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE
COMBINED.
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
YES
AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY, INCLUDING ALL
OWNED, HIRED, NON-OWNED
BODILY INJURY
- EACH PERSON
- EACH OCCURRENCE
PROPERTY DAMAGE
BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY
DAMAGE, COMBINED
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
YES
PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING,
ERRORS AND OMISSIONS, MALPRACTICE
(WHEN APPLICABLE), AND NEGLIGENT
PERFORMANCE
ALL DAMAGES $1,000,000
YES
THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IS TO BE NAMED AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED: CONSULTANT, AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE, SHALL
OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN, IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TERM OF ANY RESULTANT AGREEMENT, THE
INSURANCE COVERAGE HEREIN DESCRIBED, INSURING NOT ONLY CONSULTANT AND ITS SUBCONSULTANTS, IF ANY, BUT ALSO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION, EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL INSURANCE, NAMING AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS CITY, ITS COUNCIL MEMBERS, OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES.
I. INSURANCE COVERAGE MUST INCLUDE:
A. A CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT PROVIDING INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR CONSULTANT’S AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY CITY.
II. THE CONSULTANT MUST SUBMIT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURANCE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE AT THE FOLLOWING URL: HTTPS://WWW.PLANETBIDS.COM/PORTAL/PORTAL.CFM?COMPANYID=25569
III. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE INSURANCE AFFORDED TO ADDITIONAL INSUREDS:
A. PRIMARY COVERAGE
WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED, INSURANCE AS
AFFORDED BY THIS POLICY IS PRIMARY AND IS NOT ADDITIONAL TO OR CONTRIBUTING WITH ANY OTHER INSURANCE CARRIED BY OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL INSUREDS.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 148
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
B. CROSS LIABILITY
THE NAMING OF MORE THAN ONE PERSON, FIRM, OR CORPORATION AS INSUREDS UNDER THE POLICY SHALL
NOT, FOR THAT REASON ALONE, EXTINGUISH ANY RIGHTS OF THE INSURED AGAINST ANOTHER, BUT THIS
ENDORSEMENT, AND THE NAMING OF MULTIPLE INSUREDS, SHALL NOT INCREASE THE TOTA L LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY UNDER THIS POLICY.
C. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION
1. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN THE NON- PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE CONSULTANT SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A THIRTY (30) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION.
2. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR THE NON -PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE CONSULTANT SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A TEN (10) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION.
EVIDENCE OF INSURANCE AND OTHER RELATED NOTICES ARE REQUIRED TO BE FILED WITH THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AT THE FOLLOWING URL:
HTTPS://WWW.PLANETBIDS.COM/PORTAL/PORTAL.CFM?COMPANYID=25569
OR
HTTP://WWW.CITYOFPALOALTO.ORG/GOV/DEPTS/ASD/PLANET_BIDS_HOW_TO.ASP
DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 149
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
EXHIBIT E
DIR REGISTRATION FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS
This Exhibit shall apply only to a contract for public works construction, alteration, demolition, repair or maintenance work, CITY will not accept a bid proposal from or enter into this Agreement with CONSULTANT without proof that CONSULTANT and its listed subcontractors are registered with the California Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”) to perform public work, subject to limited exceptions. City requires CONSULTANT and its listed subcontractors, if any, to comply with all applicable requirements of the California Labor Code including but not limited to Labor Code Sections 1720 through 1861, and all applicable related regulations, including but not limited to Subchapter 3, Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations Section 16000 et seq., as amended from time to time. This Exhibit E applies in addition to the provisions of Section 26 (Prevailing Wages and DIR Registration for Public Works Contracts) of the Agreement.
CITY provides notice to CONSULTANT of the requirements of California Labor Code Section 1771.1(a), which reads:
“A contractor or subcontractor shall not be qualified to bid on, be listed in a bid proposal, subject to the requirements of Section 4104 of the Public Contract Code, or engage in the p erformance of any contract for public work, as defined in this chapter, unless currently registered and qualified to perform public work pursuant to Section 1725.5. It is not a violation of this section for an unregistered contractor to submit a bid that is authorized by Section 7029.1 of the Business and Professions Code or Section 10164 or 20103.5 of the Public Contract Code, provided the contractor is registered to perform public work pursuant to Section 1725.5 at the time the contract is awarded.”
This Project is subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by DIR. All contractors must be registered with DIR per Labor Code Section 1725.5 in order to submit a bid. All subcontractors must also be registered with DIR. No contractor or subcontractor may be awarded a contract for public work on a public works project unless registered with DIR. Additional information regarding public works and prevailing wage requirements is available on the DIR web site (see e.g. http://www.dir.ca.gov) as amended from time to time.
CITY gives notice to CONSULTANT and its listed subcontractors that CONSULTANT is required to post all job site notices prescribed by law or regulation.
CONSULTANT shall furnish certified payroll re cords directly to the Labor Commissioner (DIR) in accordance with Subchapter 3, Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations Section 16461 (8 CCR Section 16461).
CITY requires CONSULTANT and its listed subcontractors to comply with the requirements of Labor Code Section 1776, including but not limited to:
Keep accurate payroll records, showing the name, address, social security number, work classification, straight time and overtime hours worked each day and week, and the actual per DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 150
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
diem wages paid to e ach journeyman, apprentice, worker, or other employee employed by, respectively, CONSULTANT and its listed subcontractors, in connection with the Project.
The payroll records shall be verified as true and correct and shall be certified and made available for inspection at all reasonable hours at the principal office of CONSULTANT and its listed subcontractors, respectively.
At the request of CITY, acting by its Project Manager, CONSULTANT and its listed subcontractors shall make the certified payroll records available for inspection or furnished upon request to the CITY Project Manager within ten (10) days of receipt of CITY’s request.
CITY requests CONSULTANT and its listed subcon tractors to submit the certified payroll records to CITY’s Project Manager at the end of each week during the Project.
If the certified payroll records are not provided as required within the 10 -day period, then CONSULTANT and its listed subcontractors sh all be subject to a penalty of one hundred dollars ($100.00) per calendar day, or portion thereof, for each worker, and CITY shall withhold the sum total of penalties from the progress payment(s) then due and payable to CONSULTANT.
Inform CITY’s Project M anager of the location of CONSULTANT’s and its listed subcontractors’ payroll records (street address, city and county) at the commencement of the Project, and also provide notice to CITY’s Project Manager within five (5) business days of any change of loc ation of those payroll records.
Eight (8) hours labor constitutes a legal day’s work. CONSULTANT shall forfeit as a penalty to CITY, $25.00 for each worker employed in the execution of the Agreement by CONSULTANT or any subcontractor for each calendar da y during which such worker is required or permitted to work more than eight (8) hours in any one calendar day or forty (40) hours in any one calendar week in violation of the provisions of the Labor Code, and in particular, Sections 1810 through 1815 thereof, except that work performed by employees of CONSULTANT or any subcontractor in excess of eight (8) hours per day, or forty (40) hours during any one week, shall be permitted upon compensation for all hours worked in excess of eight (8) hours per day, or forty (40) hours per week, at not less than one and one -half (1&1/2) times the basic rate of pay, as provided in Section 1815.
CONSULTANT shall secure the payment of workers’ compensation to its employees as provided in Labor Code Sections 1860 and 3700 (Labor Code 1861). CONSULTANT shall sign and file with the CITY a statutorily prescribed statement acknowledging its obligation to secure the payment of workers’ compensation to its employees before beginning work (Labor Code 1861).
CONSULTANT shall post job site notices per regulation (Labor Code 1771.4(a)(2)).
CONSULTANT shall comply with the statutory requirements regarding employment of apprentices including without limitation Labor Code Section 1777.5. The statutory provisions will be enforced for penalties for failure to pay prevailing wages and for failure to comply with wage and hour laws.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 151
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
EXHIBIT F
CLAIMS FOR PUBLIC CONTRACT CODE SECTION 9204 PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS
The provisions of this Exhibit are provided in compliance with Public Contract Code Section 9204; they provide the exclusive procedures for any claims pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 9204 related to the Services performed under this Agreement.
1. Claim Definition. “Claim” mea ns a separate demand by the Contractor sent by registered mail or certified mail with return receipt requested, for one or more of the following:
(A) A time extension, including, without limitation, for relief from damages or penalties for delay assessed by the City.
(B) Payment by the City of money or damages arising from the Services performed by, or on behalf of, the Contractor pursuant to the Agreement and payment for which is not otherwise expressly provided or to which the Contractor is not otherwise entitled. (C) Payment of an amount that is disputed by the City.
2. Claim Process.
(A) Timing. Any Claim must be submitted to City in compliance with the requirements of this Exhibit no later than fourteen (14) days following the event or occurrence giving rise to the Claim. This time requirement is mandatory; failure to submit a Claim within fourteen (14) days will result in its being deemed waived.
(B) Submission. The Claim must be submitted to City in writing, clearly identified as a “Claim” sub mitted pursuant to this Exhibit, and must include reasonable documentation substantiating the Claim. The Claim must clearly identify and describe the dispute, including relevant references to applicable portions of the Agreement, and a chronology of relev ant events. Any Claim for additional payment must include a complete, itemized breakdown of all labor, materials, taxes, insurance, and subcontract, or other costs. Substantiating documentation such as payroll records, receipts, invoices, or the like, must be submitted in support of each claimed cost. Any Claim for an extension of time or delay costs must be substantiated with schedule analysis and narrative depicting and explaining claimed time impacts.
(C) Review. Upon receipt of a Claim in compliance with this Exhibit, the City shall conduct a reasonable review of the Claim and, within a period not to exceed 45 days from receipt, shall provide the Contractor a written statement identifying what portion of the Claim is disputed and what portion is undisputed. Upon receipt of a Claim, the City and Contractor may, by mutual agreement, extend the time period provided in this paragraph 2.
(D) If City Council Approval Required. If the City needs approval from the City Council to provide the Contractor a wr itten statement identifying the disputed portion and the undisputed portion of the Claim, and the City Council does not meet within the 45 days or within the mutually agreed to extension of time following receipt of a Claim sent by registered mail or DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 152
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
certified mail, return receipt requested, the City shall have up to three days following the next duly publicly noticed meeting of the City Council after the 45-day period, or extension, expires to provide the Contractor a written statement identifying the disputed portion and the undisputed portion.
(E) Payment. Any payment due on an undisputed portion of the Claim shall be processed and made within 60 days after the City issues its written statement. If the City fails to issue a written statement, paragraph 3, below, shall apply.
3. Disputed Claims
(A) Meet and Confer. If the Contractor disputes the City's written response, or if the City fails to respond to a Claim submitted pursuant to this Exhibit within the time prescribed, the Contractor may demand in writing an informal conference to meet and confer for settlement of the issues in dispute. Upon receipt of a demand in writing sent by registered mail or certified mail, return receipt requested, the City shall schedule a meet and confer conference with in 30 days for settlement of the dispute. Within 10 business days following the conclusion of the meet and confer conference, if the Claim or any portion of the Claim remains in dispute, the City shall provide the Contractor a written statement identifying the portion of the Claim that remains in dispute and the portion that is undisputed. Any payment due on an undisputed portion of the Claim shall be processed and made within 60 days after the City issues its written statement.
(B) Mediation. Any remain ing disputed portion of the Claim, as identified by the Contractor in writing, shall be submitted to nonbinding mediation, with the City and the Contractor sharing the associated costs equally. The City and Contractor shall mutually agree to a mediator within 10 business days after the disputed portion of the Claim has been identified in writing by the Contractor. 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 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 sh all be subject to any other remedies authorized by the Agreement and laws.
(i) For purposes of this paragraph 3.B, mediation includes any nonbinding process, including, but not limited to, neutral evaluation or a dispute review board, in which an independent third party or board assists the parties in dispute resolution through negotiation or by issuance of an evaluation. Any mediation utilized shall conform to the timeframes in this section.
(ii) Unless otherwise agreed to by the City and the Contractor in writing, the mediation conducted pursuant to this section shall excuse any further obligation, if any, under Public Contract Code Section 20104.4 to mediate after litigation has been commenced.
4. City’s Failure to Respond. Failure by the City to res pond to a Claim from the Contractor within the time periods described in this Exhibit or to otherwise meet the time requirements of this Exhibit shall result in the Claim being deemed rejected in its entirety. A Claim DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 153
Professional Services
Rev. Dec.15, 2020
that is denied by reason of the City's failure to have responded to a Claim, or its failure to otherwise meet the time requirements of this Exhibit, shall not constitute an adverse finding with regard to the merits of the Claim or the responsibility or qualifications of the Contractor.
5. Interest. Amounts not paid in a timely manner as required by this section shall bear interest at seven (7) percent per annum.
6. Approved Subcontractor Claims. If an approved subcontractor or a lower tier subcontractor lacks legal standing to assert a Clai m against the 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 City 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 Contractor did not pre sent the claim, provide the subcontractor with a statement of the reasons for not having done so.
7. Waiver of Provisions. A waiver of the rights granted by Public Contract Code Section 9204 is void and contrary to public policy, provided, however, that (1) upon receipt of a Claim, the parties may mutually agree to waive, in writing, mediation and proceed directly to the commencement of a civil action or binding arbitration, as applicable; and (2) the City may prescribe reasonable change order, claim, and dispute resolution procedures and requirements in addition to the provisions of Public Contract Code Section 9204, so long as the contractual provisions do not conflict with or otherwise impair the timeframes and procedures set forth in this section.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 06003111-3850-4CFE-A077-1A9A38D783A4
10.a
Packet Pg. 154
City of Palo Alto (ID # 14052)
City Council Staff Report
Meeting Date: 2/28/2022
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Title: PUBLIC HEARING: Objections to Weed Abatement and Adoption of a Resolution Ordering Weed Nuisance Abated
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Fire
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council hold a Public Hearing to hear and consider any objections to the proposed destruction and removal of weeds and adopt the Resolution (Attachment A) ordering the abatement of weed nuisances in the City of Palo Alto.
Executive Summary
The City of Palo Alto contracts with Santa Clara County Agriculture and Resource Management to remove and destroy weeds, as defined in Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 8.08 . This hearing allows all those affected and listed on the County’s 20 22 Weed Abatement Program Commencement Report (Attachment B) to be heard and have their objections and comments considered by the Council before the Council adopts a R esolution ordering the abatement of weed nuisances in the City.
An overview of the program and annual calendar for the steps involving City Coun cil action is provided in Attachment C.
Background
The Council adopted Resolution 13895 on January 24 , 202 1, and declared weeds to be a nuisance, and ordered the abatement of that nuisance as called for in Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 8.08 (Linked Here). Resolution 13895 provided for a public hearing date of February 28, 2022, and required notice to interested property owners and the public.
Discussion
The Santa Clara County Department of Agri culture and Resource Management maintains the contract for abatement of weeds within the City of Palo Alto. Upon notification of the City Council’s January 24, 2022, declaring weeds to be a nuisance and ordering abatement thereof, the Department of Agriculture and Resource Management took steps to notify each property owner by mail of the proposed weed abatement action on respective properties and posted, on the public notice bulletin board, a list of the properties affected. The Department of 11 Packet Pg. 155
City of Palo Alto Page 2
Agriculture and Resource Management has furnished copies of the property listing to the City Clerk and the City Fire Marshal. The City Clerk also posted and published notice of the hearing as required.
At this public hearing, property owners may appear and object to the proposed weed destruction or removal. After the hearing and consid eration of any objections, the Council may sustain or overrule any or all objections. If objections are susta ined, the Council may remove properties from the weed abatement commencement report. Upon adoption of the Resolution confirming the weed abatement commencement report and ordering weed nuisances abated, the County will be asked to perform the abatement work to destroy and remove any weeds.
Resource Impact
All charges for the weed abatement services are included as a special assessment on bills for property taxes levied against the respective lots and parcels of land, which are considered liens on these properties.
Policy Implications
This procedure is consistent with existing City policies and Municipal Code Chapter 8.08.
Stakeholder Engagement
The Council adopted Resolution 13895 on January 24,2022 declaring weeds to be a nuisance and ordering the abate ment of that nuisance as called for in Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter
8.08. The Commencement Report was posted publicly in Palo Alto on February 17, 2022.
The notices for the City Council’s February 28, 2022 public hearing ran in the newspaper on February 17, 2022 and February 25, 2022 , and the SCCDEH weed abatement program mailed out notice of the public hearing, to all addresses on the commencement list on January 31, 2022.
Environmental Review
Santa Clara County has determined the Weed Abatement Program to be Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA guidelines Sections 15308.
Attachments:
• Attachment11.a: Attachment A: Resolution
• Attachment11.b: Attachment B: 2022 Palo Alto Commencement Report • Attachment11.c: Attachment C: CPA Weed Abatement 3.0
11 Packet Pg. 156
/i255
/i255 /2/i255/i255
/3 /2 /4 /3 /3 /5 /6 /7 /6 /3 /6 /2 /3 /2 /6 /8 /7 /9 /10 /2 /4 /i255 /11 /12 /13 /14 /15 /16 /17 /18 /14 /19 /i255 /20 /14 /21 /i255 /22 /22 /23 /24 /i255 /11 /12 /13 /14 /15 /16 /17 /18 /14 /19 /i255 /14 /25 /i255 /17 /26 /12 /i255 /27 /14 /16 /19 /28 /18 /15 /i255 /14 /25 /i255 /17 /26 /12 /i255 /27 /18 /17 /29 /i255 /14 /25 /i255 /30 /31 /15 /14 /i255 /32 /15 /17 /14 /i255 /33 /34 /35 /12 /34 /18 /19 /36 /i255 /i255 /37/12/12 /35 /i255 /20 /16 /18 /13 /31 /19 /28 /12 /i255 /32 /38 /31 /17 /12 /35 /i255 /i255
/i255
/11 /i255 /39 /i255 /27 /i255 /40 /i255 /41 /i255 /32 /i255 /42 /i255 /43 /i255 /i255 /i255
/32 /21 /i255 /i255 /33 /19 /i255 /45 /12 /28 /12/46/38/12 /34 /i255 /47 /48 /49 /i255 /50 /51 /50 /51 /i255 /17 /26 /12 /i255 /30 /31 /15 /14 /i255 /32 /15 /17 /14 /i255 /27 /18 /17 /29 /i255 /27 /14 /16 /19 /28 /18 /15 /i255 /31 /35 /14 /52 /17 /12 /35 /i255 /11 /12 /13 /14 /15 /16 /17 /18 /14 /19 /i255/20 /14 /21 /i255 /22 /22 /23 /47 /i255 /35 /12 /28 /15 /31 /34 /18 /19 /36 /i255/53 /12 /12 /35 /13 /i255 /17 /14 /i255 /38 /12 /i255 /31 /i255 /19 /16 /18 /13 /31 /19 /28 /12 /i255 /31 /19 /35 /i255 /13 /12 /17 /17 /18 /19 /36 /i255 /54 /31 /19 /16 /31 /34 /29 /i255 /47 /47 /49 /i255 /50 /51 /50 /47 /i255 /31 /17 /i255 /55 /56 /51 /51 /i255 /52 /21/46/21/i255 /14 /34/i255 /31 /13 /i255 /13 /14 /14 /19 /i255 /17 /26 /12 /34 /12 /31 /25 /17 /12 /34/i255 /31 /13 /i255 /17 /26 /12 /i255/46/31/17 /17 /12 /34 /i255/46/31/29 /i255 /38 /12 /i255 /26 /12 /31 /34 /35 /49 /i255 /18 /19 /i255 /17 /26 /12 /i255 /27 /18 /57 /18 /28 /i255 /27 /12 /19 /17 /12 /34 /i255 /31 /13 /i255 /17 /26 /12 /i255 /17 /18/46/12/i255 /31 /19 /35 /i255 /52 /15 /31 /28 /12 /i255 /25 /14 /34 /i255 /31 /i255 /26/12 /31 /34 /18 /19 /36 /i255 /14 /25 /i255 /14 /38 /58 /12 /28 /17 /18 /14 /19 /13/i255 /17 /14 /i255 /17 /26 /12 /i255 /52 /34 /14 /52 /14 /13 /12 /35 /i255 /35 /12 /13 /17 /34 /16 /28 /17 /18 /14 /19 /i255 /31 /19 /35 /i255 /34 /12/46/14/57 /31 /15 /i255 /14 /25 /i255 /53 /12 /12 /35 /13 /59 /i255 /31 /19 /35 /i255 /i255
/60 /21 /i255 /i255 /40 /19 /i255 /31 /28 /28 /14 /34 /35 /31 /19 /28 /12 /i255 /53 /18 /17 /26 /i255 /13 /31 /18 /35 /i255 /11 /12 /13 /14 /15 /16 /17 /18 /14 /19 /49 /i255 /19 /14 /17 /18 /28 /12 /i255 /14 /25 /i255 /13 /16 /28 /26 /i255 /26 /12 /31 /34 /18 /19 /36 /i255 /53 /31 /13 /i255 /36 /18 /57 /12/19 /i255 /18 /19 /i255 /17 /26 /12 /i255 /46/31/19 /19 /12 /34 /i255 /52/34 /14 /57 /18 /35 /12 /35 /i255 /38 /29 /i255 /15 /31 /53 /49 /i255 /31 /13 /i255 /31 /52 /52 /12 /31 /34 /13 /i255 /25 /34 /14/46/i255/17 /26 /12 /i255 /31 /25 /25 /18 /35 /31 /57 /18 /17 /13 /i255 /14 /19 /i255 /25 /18 /15 /12 /i255 /18 /19 /i255 /17 /26 /12 /i255 /33 /25 /25 /18 /28 /12 /i255 /14 /25 /i255 /17 /26 /12 /i255 /27/18 /17 /29 /i255 /27 /15 /12 /34 /61 /59 /i255 /31 /19 /35 /i255
/i255
/27 /21 /i255 /i255 /32 /15 /15 /i255 /52 /12 /34 /13 /14 /19 /13 /i255 /35 /12 /13 /18 /34 /18 /19 /36 /i255 /17 /14 /i255 /38 /12 /i255 /26 /12 /31 /34 /35 /i255 /53 /12 /34 /12 /i255 /36 /18 /57 /12 /19 /i255 /31 /19 /i255 /14 /52 /52 /14 /34 /17 /16 /19 /18 /17 /29 /i255 /17 /14 /i255 /38 /12 /i255 /26 /12 /31 /34/35 /49 /i255 /31 /19 /35 /i255 /31 /15 /15 /i255 /46/31/17 /17 /12 /34 /13 /i255 /31 /19/35 /i255 /17 /26 /18 /19 /36 /13 /i255 /52 /12 /34 /17 /31 /18 /19 /18 /19 /36 /i255 /17 /14 /i255 /13 /31 /18 /35 /i255 /53 /12 /12 /35 /i255 /31 /38 /31 /17 /12/46/12/19 /17 /i255 /53 /12 /34 /12 /i255 /25 /16 /15 /15 /29 /i255 /26 /12 /31 /34 /35 /i255 /31 /19 /35 /i255 /28 /14 /19 /13 /18 /35 /12 /34 /12/35 /i255 /38 /29 /i255 /17 /26 /18 /13 /i255 /27 /14 /16 /19 /28 /18 /15 /21 /i255
/i255
/i255
/20 /33/37/49/i255 /41 /62 /39 /11 /39 /63 /33 /11 /39 /49 /i255 /17 /26 /12 /i255 /27 /14 /16 /19 /28 /18 /15 /i255 /14 /25 /i255 /17 /26 /12 /i255 /27 /18 /17 /29 /i255 /14 /25 /i255 /30 /31 /15 /14 /i255 /32 /15 /17 /14 /i255 /11 /39 /43 /33 /42 /64 /39 /43 /i255 /31 /13 /i255 /25 /14 /15 /15 /14 /53 /13/56 /i255 /i255
/43 /39 /27 /41 /40 /33 /20 /i255 /47 /21 /i255 /i255 /i255 /33 /38 /58 /12 /28 /17 /18 /14 /19 /13 /i255 /31 /34 /12 /i255 /13 /16 /13 /17 /31 /18 /19 /12 /35 /i255 /25 /14 /34 /i255 /17 /26 /12 /i255 /25 /14 /15 /15 /14 /53 /18 /19 /36 /i255 /31 /35 /35 /34 /12 /13 /13 /12 /13 /49 /i255 /53 /26 /18 /28 /26 /i255 /26/31 /57 /12 /i255 /38 /12 /12 /19 /i255 /34 /12/46/14/57 /12 /35 /i255 /25/34 /14/46/i255/17 /26 /12 /i255 /50 /51 /50 /47 /i255/37/12/12 /35 /i255 /32 /38 /31 /17 /12/46/12/19 /17 /i255 /27 /14/46/46/12/19 /28 /12/46/12/19 /17 /i255 /11 /12 /52 /14 /34 /17 /56 /i255 /48 /47 /22 /i255/37/18/15 /17 /14 /19 /49 /i255 /50 /55 /55/51 /i255 /60 /34 /29 /31 /19 /17 /49 /i255 /50 /23 /48 /22 /i255 /65 /34 /12 /12/34 /49 /i255 /23 /55 /48 /51 /i255 /42 /16 /52 /18 /19 /12 /i255 /32 /57 /12 /19 /16 /12 /49 /i255 /48 /22 /24 /i255 /42 /14/46/31/i255 /64 /12 /34 /35 /12 /49 /i255 /50 /24 /51 /24 /i255 /60 /34 /29 /31 /19 /17 /49 /i255 /24 /48 /i255 /11 /14 /14 /13 /12 /57 /12 /15 /17 /49 /i255 /23 /66 /23 /50 /i255 /43/17 /31 /25 /25 /i255 /67 /18 /19 /36 /49 /i255 /23 /66 /23 /24 /i255 /43 /17 /31 /34/34 /i255 /67 /18 /19 /36 /49 /i255 /50 /24 /22 /i255 /63 /12 /34 /19 /31 /19 /35 /14 /49 /i255 /23 /47 /i255 /30 /34 /18/46/34/14 /13 /12 /49 /i255 /47 /51 /66 /47 /i255 /39/46/38/31 /34 /28 /31 /35 /12 /34 /14 /49 /i255 /24 /55 /48 /i255 /39/46/38/31 /34 /28 /31 /35/12 /34 /14 /49 /i255 /47 /50 /24 /i255 /67 /18 /19 /36 /13 /15 /12 /29 /49 /i255 /50/55 /66 /47 /i255 /60 /34 /29 /31 /19 /17 /49 /i255 /23 /68 /68 /51 /i255 /30 /31 /34 /61 /49 /i255 /23 /55 /68 /i255/37/18/15 /17 /14 /19 /49 /i255 /48 /68 /50 /i255 /63 /12 /34 /19 /31 /19 /35 /14 /49 /i255 /23 /47 /23 /51 /i255 /11 /31/46/14/19 /31 /49 /i255 /23 /51 /66 /51 /i255/69/18/35 /35 /15 /12 /25 /18 /12 /15 /35 /49 /i255 /50 /55 /50 /51 /i255/69/18/35/35 /15 /12 /25 /18 /12 /15 /35 /49 /i255 /55 /48 /22 /i255/69/31/29 /38 /12 /15 /15 /49 /i255 /48 /47 /23 /66 /i255 /45 /14 /19 /31 /15 /35 /49 /i255 /24 /22 /68 /i255/69/14/28 /61 /18 /19 /36 /38 /34 /18 /35 /49 /i255 /31 /19 /35 /i255 /23 /51 /51 /51 /i255 /32 /15 /12 /70 /18 /13 /21 /i255 /i255/32 /15 /15 /i255 /14 /17 /26 /12 /34 /i255 /14 /38 /58 /12 /28 /17 /18 /14 /19 /13/i255 /17 /14 /i255 /17 /26 /12 /i255 /52 /34 /14 /52 /14 /13 /12 /35 /i255 /35 /12 /13 /17 /34 /16 /28 /17 /18 /14 /19 /i255 /31 /19 /35 /i255 /34 /12/46/14/57 /31 /15 /i255 /14 /25 /i255 /13 /16 /28 /26 /i255 /53 /12 /12 /35 /13 /i255 /31 /34 /12 /i255 /14 /57 /12 /34 /34 /16 /15 /12 /35 /21 /i255 /i255
/43 /39 /27 /41 /40 /33 /20 /i255 /50 /21 /i255 /i255 /i255 /41 /26 /12 /i255 /63 /18 /34 /12 /i255 /27 /26 /18 /12 /25 /i255 /26 /12 /34 /12 /38 /29 /i255 /18 /13 /i255 /14 /34 /35 /12 /34 /12 /35 /i255 /17 /14 /i255 /35 /14 /i255 /31 /15 /15 /i255 /17 /26 /18 /19 /36 /13 /i255 /19 /12 /28 /12 /13/13 /31 /34 /29 /i255 /31 /19 /35 /i255 /31 /16 /17 /26 /14 /34 /18 /71 /12 /35/i255 /18 /19 /i255 /27 /26 /31 /52 /17 /12 /34 /i255 /24 /21 /51 /24 /i255 /14 /25 /i255 /17 /26 /12 /i255 /30 /31 /15 /14 /i255 /32 /15 /17 /14 /i255/69/16/19 /18 /28 /18 /52 /31 /15 /i255 /27 /14 /35 /12 /i255 /17 /14 /i255 /31 /38 /31 /17 /12 /i255 /13 /16 /28 /26 /i255 /19 /16 /18 /13 /31 /19 /28 /12 /49 /i255 /14 /34 /i255/28 /31 /16 /13 /12 /i255 /17 /26 /12 /i255 /13 /31/46/12/i255 /17 /14 /i255 /38/12 /i255 /31 /38 /31 /17 /12 /35 /i255 /38 /29 /i255 /28 /14 /19 /17 /34 /31 /28 /17 /i255 /53 /18 /17 /26 /i255 /17 /26 /12 /i255 /27 /14 /16 /19 /17 /29 /i255 /14 /25 /i255 /43 /31 /19 /17 /31 /i255 /27 /15 /31 /34 /31 /21 /i255 /i255
/72 /72 /i255
/i255
/72 /72 /i255
/i255
/72 /72 /i255
/i255
/72 /72 /i255
/i255
/72 /72 /i255
/73 /74 /75 /76 /77 /78 /79 /80 /i255 /82 /80 /83 /84 /85 /74 /86 /84 /i255 /87 /73 /88 /i255 /89 /90 /91 /82 /92 /93 /94 /94 /95 /96 /94 /97 /98 /95 /94 /99 /92 /92 /95 /90 /92 /100 /92 /95 /90 /89 /92 /94 /96 /101 /82 /90 /102 /98 /96 /91
11.a
Packet Pg. 157
/i255
/i255 /2/i255/i255
/3 /4 /5 /3 /3 /6 /2 /7 /2 /3 /2 /4 /3 /4 /2 /8 /7 /9 /10 /4 /5 /i255 /i255
/11 /12 /13 /14 /15 /16 /17 /i255 /18 /19 /i255 /i255 /i255 /14 /20 /21 /i255 /13 /22 /23 /24 /25 /26 /i255 /22 /27 /i255 /11 /28 /24 /25 /28 /i255 /13 /29 /28 /30 /28 /i255 /28 /31 /i255 /29 /21 /28 /32 /i255 /28 /33 /21 /24 /34 /26 /i255 /20 /28 /31 /i255 /32 /21 /25 /21 /30/35/36/24 /21 /32 /i255 /25 /20 /28 /25 /i255 /25 /20 /36 /31 /i255 /37 /38 /39 /40 /41 /42 /43 /i255 /45 /46 /i255 /41 /47 /41/48/37/43 /i255 /49 /38 /39/48/i255/43 /50 /41 /i255 /37 /38 /39 /51 /45 /46 /45 /39 /52 /46 /i255 /39 /49 /i255 /43 /50 /41 /i255 /53 /54 /55 /45 /49 /39 /38 /52 /45 /54 /i255 /56 /52 /51 /45 /38 /39 /52/48/41/52 /43 /54 /55 /i255 /57 /58 /54 /55 /45 /43 /59 /i255 /60 /42 /43 /i255 /61 /62 /53 /56 /57 /60 /63 /64 /i255 /23 /24 /32 /21 /30 /i255 /13 /12 /65/66 /i255 /67 /23 /36 /32 /21 /29 /36 /24 /21 /31 /i255 /11 /21 /34 /25 /36 /22 /24 /i255 /68 /69 /18 /70 /71 /i255 /28 /31 /i255 /28 /24 /i255 /28 /34 /25 /36 /22 /24 /i255 /72 /26 /i255 /30 /21 /33 /23 /29 /28 /25 /22 /30 /26 /i255 /28 /33 /21 /24 /34 /36 /21 /31 /i255 /28 /23 /25 /20 /22 /30 /36 /73 /21 /32/i255 /72 /26 /i255 /31 /25 /28 /25 /21 /i255 /22 /30 /i255 /29 /22 /34 /28 /29 /i255 /22 /30/32 /36 /24 /28 /24 /34 /21 /i255 /25 /22 /i255 /28 /31 /31 /23 /30 /21 /i255 /25 /20 /21 /i255/35/28/36 /24 /25 /21 /24 /28 /24 /34 /21 /74 /i255 /30 /21 /31 /25 /22 /30 /28 /25 /36 /22 /24 /74 /i255 /21 /24 /20 /28 /24 /34 /21/35/21/24 /25 /74 /i255 /22 /30 /i255 /75 /30 /22 /25 /21 /34 /25 /36/22 /24 /i255 /22 /27 /i255 /25 /20 /21 /i255 /21 /24 /76 /36 /30 /22 /24/35/21/24 /25 /19 /i255
/i255
/i255
/15 /17 /14 /77 /16 /78 /79 /13/12 /78 /i255 /66 /17 /78 /i255 /80 /66 /11 /11 /12 /78 /81 /i255 /i255/82/28/30 /34 /20 /i255 /68 /74 /i255 /83 /70 /83 /68 /i255 /i255
/66 /84 /12 /11 /81 /i255/85 /79 /77 /14 /74 /i255 /13 /16 /77/82/66/13 /86 /74 /i255 /78 /79 /85 /16 /15 /11 /74 /i255 /87 /15 /88 /11 /12 /14 /89 /74 /i255 /86 /16 /79 /74 /i255 /11 /14 /16 /17 /12 /74 /i255 /14 /66 /17 /66 /86 /66 /i255 /i255
/17 /16 /12 /11 /81 /i255
/i255
/66 /85 /11 /12 /17 /14 /81 /i255
/i255
/i255
/66 /85 /11 /14 /12 /17 /14 /15 /16/17 /11 /81 /i255
/i255
/66 /14 /14 /12 /11 /14 /81 /i255/i255
/i255
/90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90/90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90/i255/i255 /90/90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /i255 /13 /36 /25 /26 /i255 /13 /29 /21 /30 /91 /i255/i255 /i255/i255/i255/i255/82 /28/26 /22 /30 /i255 /i255
/66 /80 /80 /77 /16 /92 /12 /78/i255 /66 /11 /i255 /14 /16 /i255 /87 /16 /77/82/81/i255 /i255/i255/66/80 /80 /77 /16 /92 /12 /78 /81 /i255 /i255
/90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90/90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90/i255/i255 /90/90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /i255 /66 /31 /31 /36 /31 /25 /28 /24 /25 /i255 /13/36 /25 /26 /i255 /66 /25 /25 /22 /30 /24 /21 /26/i255 /i255/i255/13/36 /25 /26 /i255/82/28/24 /28 /33 /21 /30 /i255 /i255
/i255 /i255 /i255/i255/i255/i255/90/90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255/i255/i255/i255/87/36 /30 /21 /i255 /13 /20 /36 /21 /27 /i255 /i255
/i255 /i255 /i255/i255/i255/i255/90/90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /90 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255/i255/i255/i255/78/36 /30 /21 /34 /25 /22 /30 /i255 /22 /27 /i255 /66 /32/35/36/24 /36 /31 /25 /30 /28 /25 /36 /76 /21 /i255 /11 /21 /30 /76 /36 /34 /21 /31 /i255 /i255
/i255
/i255
/93 /94 /95 /96 /97 /98 /99 /100 /i255 /102 /100 /103 /104 /105 /94 /106 /104 /i255 /107 /93 /108 /i255 /109 /110 /111 /102 /112 /113 /114 /114 /115 /116 /114 /117 /118 /115 /114 /119 /112 /112 /115 /110 /112 /120 /112 /115 /110 /109 /112 /114 /116 /121 /102 /110 /122 /118 /116 /111
11.a
Packet Pg. 158
/0 /1 /2 /3 /4 /5 /4 /6 /7 /3 /1 /i255/9/5/i255 /0 /10/11/12/13 /1 /3 /4 /10 /14 /15 /16 /17 /18 /19 /20 /21 /18 /i255 /23 /24 /25 /i255 /26 /27/28 /15 /29 /30 /31 /31 /32 /31 /33 /34 /31 /35 /29 /29 /27 /29 /36 /29 /27 /26 /29 /31 /32 /37 /15 /27 /38 /34 /32/28/39 /40 /41 /40 /42 /43 /25 /i255 /33 /20/44/21/19 /18 /40 /18 /24 /39 /42 /45 /46 /18 /47 /40 /25 /i255 /48 /19 /18 /41 /43 /18/i255 /49 /20 /47 /42 /39 /50 /51 /16 /25 /i255 /52 /15 /39/53/i255/28 /28 /30 /26 /i255 /52 /18 /43 /20 /19 /42 /40 /50 /20 /16 /i255 /20 /54 /i255 /40 /55 /18 /i255 /33 /20 /42 /16 /47 /50 /19 /i255 /20 /54 /i255 /40 /55 /18 /i255 /33 /50 /40 /56 /i255 /20 /54 /i255 /48 /41 /19 /20 /i255 /27 /19 /40 /20 /i255/53/57/24 /18 /57 /50 /16 /51 /i255/58/18/18 /24 /i255 /59 /42 /50 /60 /60 /60 /39 /20 /42 /57 /47 /18 /i255 /15 /16 /17 /18 /19 /20 /21/18 /25 /i255 /49 /20 /47 /42/44/18/16 /40 /i255 /48 /41 /51 /18/43 /25 /i255/32/39 /50 /51 /16 /41 /40 /42 /57 /18 /43 /25 /i255/61/15 /16 /17 /18 /19 /20 /21 /18 /i255/53/57/50 /51 /50 /16 /41 /40 /20 /57 /25 /i255 /33 /18 /57 /40 /50 /54 /50 /47 /41 /40 /18 /i255 /48 /41 /51 /18/43 /25 /i255/32/23 /16 /50 /40 /50 /41 /19 /43 /25 /i255/35/49 /41 /16 /50 /18 /19 /19 /18 /i255 /62 /41 /16 /51 /27 /42 /40 /20 /59 /41 /17 /25 /i255 /15 /16 /41 /45 /19/18 /24 /15 /16 /17 /18 /19 /20 /21 /18 /23 /24 /i255 /39 /40 /41 /44/21 /50 /16 /51 /25 /i255 /15 /16 /41 /45 /19 /18 /24 /63 /50/44/18/i255 /64 /20 /16 /18 /25 /i255 /65 /66 /63/33 /67 /35 /26 /25 /35 /35 /68 /i255 /48 /41 /47 /50 /54 /50 /47 /i255 /63 /50/44/18/i255 /65 /66 /39 /i255 /69 /i255 /33 /41 /16 /41 /24 /41 /68 /32 /29 /35 /i255 /70 /41/44/50/19 /40 /20 /16 /i255 /27 /17 /18 /48 /41 /19 /20 /i255 /27 /19 /40 /20 /i255 /71 /i255 /33 /27 /i255 /i255 /28 /31 /30 /35 /36 /49 /41 /16 /50 /18 /19 /19 /18 /60 /62 /41 /16 /51/72/47/50 /40 /56 /20 /54 /21 /41 /19 /20 /41 /19 /40 /20 /60 /20 /57 /51 /23 /48 /i255 /27 /24 /24 /57 /18 /43 /43 /25 /i255 /36 /28 /28 /60 /30 /30 /60 /30 /32 /60 /32 /29 /31 /i255 /i255 /73 /1 /6 /10 /2 /74 /i255 /75 /2 /7 /6 /76 /4 /14 /77
/39 /40 /41 /40 /42 /43 /25 /i255/53/57/50 /51 /50 /16 /41 /19 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /30 /78 /32 /78 /32 /35 /32/36 /i255 /31 /25 /29 /34 /25 /36 /28 /i255 /48 /79 /70 /20 /19 /24 /18 /57 /25 /i255 /49 /41 /16 /50 /18 /19 /19 /18 /i255 /62 /41 /16 /51 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /49 /41 /16 /50 /18 /19 /19 /18 /60 /62 /41 /16 /51/72/47/50 /40 /56 /20 /54 /21 /41 /19 /20 /41 /19 /40 /20 /60 /20 /57 /51 /80 /20 /47 /41 /40 /50 /20 /16 /25 /i255 /49 /20 /47 /42 /39 /50 /51 /16 /39 /18 /47 /42 /57 /50 /40 /56 /i255 /27 /21 /21 /19 /50 /41 /16/47 /18 /i255 /39 /40 /41 /40 /42 /43 /25 /i255 /33 /20 /16 /16 /18 /47 /40 /18/24/48 /20 /20 /19 /25 /i255 /39 /40 /41 /40 /18 /80 /20 /47 /41 /19 /39 /40 /20 /57 /41 /51 /18 /i255 /27 /21 /21 /19 /50 /41 /16/47 /18 /i255 /39 /40 /41 /40 /42 /43 /25 /i255 /33 /20 /16 /16 /18 /47 /40 /18/24/48 /20 /20 /19 /25 /i255 /33 /50 /40 /56 /i255 /20 /54 /i255 /48 /41 /19 /20 /i255 /27 /19 /40/20/80 /20 /47 /41 /40 /50 /20 /16 /25 /i255 /49 /20 /47 /42 /39 /50 /51 /16 /81 /4 /77 /14 /1 /2 /i255 /82 /83 /1 /14 /3 /84/81 /4 /77 /14 /7 /3 /85 /2/1/75 /4/11/1/84 /3 /7/11/12 /27 /19 /45 /18 /57 /40 /i255 /86 /41 /16 /51
/27 /19 /45 /18 /57 /40 /60 /86 /41 /16 /51/72/33
/50 /40 /56 /20 /54 /48 /41 /19 /20 /27 /19 /40 /20 /60 /20 /57 /51 /27 /43 /43 /50 /43 /40 /41 /16 /40 /i255 /33 /50 /40 /56 /i255 /27/40 /40 /20 /57 /16 /18 /56 /33 /50 /40 /56 /i255 /20 /54 /i255 /48 /41 /19 /20 /i255 /27 /19 /40 /20 /39 /18 /47 /42 /57 /50 /40 /56 /i255 /80 /18 /17 /18 /19 /25 /i255 /15 /44/41/50 /19 /71 /i255 /27 /47 /47 /20 /42 /16 /40 /i255 /27 /42 /40 /55 /18 /16 /40 /50 /47 /41 /40 /50 /20 /16 /i255 /65 /59 /20 /16 /18 /68
/39 /50 /51 /16 /41 /40 /42 /57 /18 /i255 /27 /24 /20 /21 /40 /50 /20 /16 /25 /i255 /48 /57 /18 /67 /43 /18 /19 /18 /47 /40 /18 /24 /i255 /39 /40 /56 /19 /18 /66 /43 /50 /16 /51 /i255 /23 /48 /i255 /27 /24 /24 /57 /18 /43 /43 /25 /i255 /28 /34 /60 /36 /32 /61 /60 /32 /28 /60 /34 /31 /39 /18 /16 /40 /25 /i255 /30 /78 /32 /78 /32 /35 /32 /36 /i255 /29 /25 /35 /31 /25 /29 /29 /i255 /48 /79 /87 /50 /18 /88 /18 /24 /25 /i255 /30 /78 /30 /78 /32 /35 /32 /36 /i255 /36 /25 /32 /31 /25 /35 /26 /i255 /48/79/i255 /39 /50 /51 /16 /18 /24 /25 /i255 /30 /78 /30 /78 /32 /35 /32 /36 /i255 /36 /25 /32 /31 /25 /30 /61 /i255 /48 /79 /82 /13 /1 /6 /3 /2 /10 /14 /4 /6 /i255 /73 /1 /6/10 /2 /74 /i255 /7 /14 /74 /i255 /81 /4 /77 /14 /7 /3 /85 /2 /1 /i255 /89 /4 /84 /6 /13 /10 /84 /85 /2 /1 /90 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /59 /20 /40 /i255/53/54/54 /18 /57 /18 /24 /i255/17 /50 /41 /i255 /49 /20 /47 /42 /39 /50 /51 /16 /62 /50 /18 /19 /56 /i255 /59 /20 /43 /18
/62 /50 /18 /19 /56 /60 /59 /20 /43 /18/72/33/50 /40
/56 /20 /54 /48 /41 /19 /20 /27 /19 /40 /20 /60 /20 /57 /51 /49 /50 /57 /18 /47 /40 /20 /57 /71 /i255 /27 /24/44/50/16/50 /43 /40 /57 /41 /40 /50 /17 /18 /i255 /39 /18 /57 /17 /50 /47 /18 /43 /78 /33 /37 /53 /33 /50 /40 /56 /i255 /20 /54 /i255 /48 /41 /19 /20 /i255 /27 /19 /40 /20 /39 /18 /47 /42 /57 /50 /40 /56 /i255 /80 /18 /17 /18 /19 /25 /i255 /15 /44/41/50 /19 /71 /i255 /27 /47 /47 /20 /42 /16 /40 /i255 /27 /42 /40 /55 /18 /16 /40 /50 /47 /41 /40 /50 /20 /16 /i255 /65 /59 /20 /16 /18 /68
/39 /50 /51 /16 /41 /40 /42 /57 /18 /i255 /27 /24 /20 /21 /40 /50 /20 /16 /25 /i255 /66 /21 /19 /20 /41 /24 /18 /24 /i255 /39 /50 /51 /16 /41 /40 /42 /57 /18 /i255 /23/44/41/51 /18 /66 /43 /50 /16 /51 /i255 /23 /48 /i255 /27 /24 /24 /57 /18 /43 /43 /25 /i255 /34 /30 /60 /34 /35 /60 /36 /30 /32 /60 /36 /30 /32 /39 /18 /16 /40 /25 /i255 /30 /78 /30 /78 /32 /35 /32 /36 /i255 /36 /25 /32 /31 /25 /30 /26 /i255 /48 /79 /87 /50/18 /88 /18 /24 /25 /i255 /30 /78 /31 /78 /32 /35 /32 /36 /i255 /31 /25 /29 /32 /25 /31 /34 /i255 /48/79/i255 /39 /50 /51 /16 /18 /24 /25 /i255 /30 /78 /31 /78 /32 /35 /32 /36 /i255 /31 /25 /29 /30 /25 /35 /34 /i255 /48 /79 /82 /13 /1 /6 /3 /2 /10 /14 /4 /6 /i255 /73 /1 /6/10 /2 /74 /i255 /7 /14 /74 /i255 /81 /4 /77 /14 /7 /3 /85 /2 /1 /i255 /89 /4 /84 /6 /13 /10 /84 /85 /2 /1 /90 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /59 /20 /40 /i255/53/54/54 /18 /57 /18 /24 /i255/17 /50 /41 /i255 /49 /20 /47 /42 /39 /50 /51 /16 /91/18/20 /54 /54 /57 /18 /56 /i255 /38 /19 /41 /47 /92 /43/55 /50 /57 /18 /91/18/20 /54 /54 /57 /18 /56 /60 /38 /19 /41 /47 /92 /43/55 /50 /57 /18/72/33/50 /40 /56 /20 /54 /48 /41 /19 /20 /27 /19 /40 /20 /60 /20 /57 /51 /37 /50 /57 /18 /i255 /33 /55 /50 /18 /54
/37 /50 /57 /18 /i255 /39 /18 /57 /17 /50 /47 /18 /43
/39 /18 /47 /42 /57 /50 /40 /56 /i255 /80 /18 /17 /18 /19 /25 /i255 /15 /44/41/50 /19 /71 /i255 /27 /47 /47 /20 /42 /16 /40 /i255 /27 /42 /40 /55 /18 /16 /40 /50 /47 /41 /40 /50 /20 /16 /i255 /65 /59 /20 /16 /18 /68
/39 /50 /51 /16 /41 /40 /42 /57 /18 /i255 /27 /24 /20 /21 /40 /50 /20 /16 /25 /i255 /48 /57 /18 /67 /43 /18 /19 /18 /47 /40 /18 /24 /i255 /39 /40 /56 /19 /18 /66 /43 /50 /16 /51 /i255 /23 /48 /i255 /27 /24 /24 /57 /18 /43 /43 /25 /i255 /36 /28 /28 /60 /30 /30 /60 /30 /32 /60 /32 /29 /31 /39 /18 /16 /40 /25 /i255 /30 /78 /31 /78 /32 /35 /32 /36 /i255 /31 /25 /29 /30 /25 /35 /28 /i255 /48 /79 /87 /50 /18 /88 /18 /24 /25/i255 /30 /78 /31 /78 /32 /35 /32 /36 /i255 /34 /25 /30 /28 /25 /30 /29 /i255 /48/79/i255 /39 /50 /51 /16 /18 /24 /25 /i255 /30 /78 /26 /78 /32 /35 /32 /36 /i255 /30 /25 /35 /31 /25 /30 /61 /i255 /48 /79 /82 /13 /1 /6 /3 /2 /10 /14 /4 /6 /i255 /73 /1 /6/10 /2 /74 /i255 /7 /14 /74 /i255 /81 /4 /77 /14 /7 /3 /85 /2 /1 /i255 /89 /4 /84 /6 /13 /10 /84 /85 /2 /1 /90 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /59 /20 /40 /i255/53/54/54 /18 /57 /18 /24 /i255/17 /50 /41 /i255 /49 /20 /47 /42 /39 /50 /51 /16 /15 /24 /i255 /39 /55 /50 /92 /41 /24 /41
/15 /24 /60 /39 /55 /50 /92 /41 /24 /41/72/33/50/40 /56 /20 /54 /48 /41 /19 /20 /27 /19 /40 /20 /60 /20 /57 /51 /15 /24 /i255 /39 /55 /50 /92 /41 /24 /41 /71 /i255 /33 /50 /40/56 /i255/79/41/16 /41 /51 /18 /57 /33 /50 /40 /56 /i255 /20 /54 /i255 /48 /41 /19 /20 /i255 /27 /19 /40 /20 /39 /18 /47 /42 /57 /50 /40 /56 /i255 /80 /18 /17 /18 /19 /25 /i255 /15/44/41/50 /19 /71 /i255 /27 /47 /47 /20 /42 /16 /40 /i255 /27 /42 /40 /55 /18 /16 /40 /50 /47 /41 /40 /50 /20 /16 /i255 /65 /59 /20 /16 /18 /68
/39 /50 /51 /16 /41 /40 /42 /57 /18 /i255 /27 /24 /20 /21 /40 /50 /20 /16 /25 /i255 /48 /57 /18 /67 /43 /18 /19 /18 /47 /40 /18 /24 /i255 /39 /40 /56 /19 /18 /66 /43 /50 /16 /51 /i255 /23 /48 /i255 /27 /24 /24 /57 /18 /43 /43 /25 /i255 /36 /28 /28 /60 /30 /30 /60 /30 /32 /60 /32 /29 /31 /39 /18 /16 /40 /25 /i255 /30 /78 /26 /78 /32 /35 /32 /36 /i255 /30 /25 /35 /31 /25 /30 /26 /i255 /48 /79 /87 /50 /18 /88 /18 /24 /25/i255 /30 /78 /26 /78 /32 /35 /32 /36 /i255 /30 /25 /32 /32 /25 /30 /29 /i255 /48/79/i255 /39 /50 /51 /16 /18 /24 /25 /i255 /30 /78 /26 /78 /32 /35 /32 /36 /i255 /30 /25 /32 /32 /25 /31 /31 /i255 /48 /79 /82 /13 /1 /6 /3 /2 /10 /14 /4 /6 /i255 /73 /1 /6/10 /2 /74 /i255 /7 /14 /74 /i255 /81 /4 /77 /14 /7 /3 /85 /2 /1 /i255 /89 /4 /84 /6 /13 /10 /84 /85 /2 /1 /90 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /59 /20 /40 /i255/53/54/54 /18 /57 /18 /24 /i255 /17 /50 /41 /i255 /49 /20 /47 /42 /39 /50 /51 /16
11.a
Packet Pg. 159
/0 /1 /2 /3 /4 /5 /i255 /7 /8 /4 /3 /9/10/0 /1 /2 /3 /11 /9 /12 /5/4/13 /1/14/4/10 /9 /11/14/15 /16 /17/18/i255/20 /21 /22 /17 /23 /24
/25 /17/18/26/17 /27 /28 /17 /21 /29 /28 /23 /30/31/32/18/33/23 /30 /34 /28 /17 /18 /35 /36 /28 /21 /27 /23 /25 /37 /i255 /38 /36 /39 /36 /30 /40 /i255 /41/18/33/23 /30 /42 /i255 /43 /28 /28 /17 /21 /29 /25 /i255 /43 /21 /25 /44 /36 /29 /25 /23 /28 /33 /25 /23 /17 /29 /i255 /45 /46 /17 /29 /36 /47
/35 /23 /32 /29 /33 /25 /21 /27 /36 /i255 /43 /48 /17 /49 /25 /23 /17 /29 /40 /i255 /50 /27 /36 /51 /24 /36 /30 /36 /28 /25 /36 /48 /i255 /35 /25 /37 /30 /36 /52 /24 /23 /29 /32 /i255 /53 /50 /i255 /43 /48 /48 /27 /36 /24 /24 /40 /i255 /54 /55 /34 /56 /34 /56 /56 /34 /54 /57 /55 /35 /36 /29 /25 /40 /i255 /58 /59 /60 /59 /54 /57 /54 /61 /i255 /58 /40 /54 /54 /40 /55 /62 /i255 /50 /63 /64 /23 /36 /65 /36 /48 /40 /i255 /58 /59 /60 /59 /54 /57 /54 /61 /i255 /62 /40 /61 /57 /40 /57 /61 /i255 /50/63/i255 /35 /23 /32 /29 /36 /48 /40 /i255 /58 /59 /60 /59 /54 /57 /54 /61 /i255 /62 /40 /61 /57 /40 /61 /58 /i255 /50 /63 /7 /66 /4 /67 /9 /5 /68 /3 /1 /67 /i255 /69 /4 /67/68 /5 /70 /i255 /11 /3 /70 /i255 /0 /1 /2 /3 /11 /9 /12 /5 /4 /i255 /71 /1 /10 /67 /66 /68 /10 /12 /5 /4 /72 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /46 /17 /25 /i255/73/26/26 /36 /27 /36 /48 /i255/39 /23 /33 /i255 /20 /17 /28 /21 /35 /23 /32 /29 /22 /36 /25 /44 /i255/63/23/29 /17 /27
/74 /36 /25 /44 /34/18/23/29 /17 /27/31/28/23 /25 /37/17 /26 /49 /33 /30 /17 /33 /30 /25 /17 /34 /17 /27 /32 /75 /23 /25 /37 /i255 /75 /30 /36 /27 /76
/75 /23 /25 /37 /i255 /17 /26 /i255 /50 /33 /30 /17 /i255 /43 /30 /25 /17 /35 /36 /28 /21 /27 /23 /25 /37 /i255 /38 /36 /39 /36 /30 /40 /i255 /41 /18/33/23 /30 /42 /i255 /43 /28 /28 /17 /21 /29 /25 /i255 /43 /21 /25 /44 /36 /29 /25 /23 /28 /33 /25 /23 /17 /29 /i255 /45 /46 /17 /29 /36 /47
/35 /23 /32 /29 /33 /25 /21 /27 /36 /i255 /43 /48 /17 /49 /25 /23 /17 /29 /40 /i255 /50 /27 /36 /51 /24 /36 /30 /36 /28 /25 /36 /48 /i255 /35 /25 /37 /30 /36 /52 /24 /23 /29 /32 /i255 /53 /50 /i255 /43 /48 /48 /27 /36 /24 /24 /40 /i255 /61 /77 /77 /34 /58 /58 /34 /58 /54 /34 /54 /56 /55 /35 /36 /29 /25 /40 /i255 /58 /59 /60 /59 /54 /57 /54 /61 /i255 /62 /40 /61 /57 /40 /61 /56 /i255 /50 /63 /64 /23 /36 /65 /36 /48 /40/i255 /58 /59 /60 /59 /54 /57 /54 /61 /i255 /62 /40 /61 /57 /40 /56 /60 /i255 /50/63/i255 /35 /23 /32 /29 /36 /48 /40 /i255 /58 /59 /60 /59 /54 /57 /54 /61 /i255 /62 /40 /61 /61 /40 /57 /62 /i255 /50 /63 /7 /66 /4 /67 /9 /5 /68 /3 /1 /67 /i255 /69 /4 /67/68 /5 /70 /i255 /11 /3 /70 /i255 /0 /1 /2 /3 /11 /9 /12 /5 /4 /i255 /71 /1 /10 /67 /66 /68 /10 /12 /5 /4 /72 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /i255 /46 /17 /25 /i255/73/26/26 /36 /27 /36 /48 /i255/39 /23 /33 /i255 /20 /17 /28 /21 /35 /23 /32 /29 /78 /3 /i255 /79 /4 /5 /10 /68 /3 /i255 /0 /1 /2 /3 /4/5 /i255 /7 /8 /4 /3 /9/10/0 /1 /2 /3 /11 /9 /12 /5/4/13 /1/14/4/10 /9 /11/14/15 /7 /70 /1 /9 /68 /5 /i255 /71 /4 /66 /1 /8 /4 /5 /80 /i255 /7/8 /4 /3 /9/10/0 /9 /11 /9 /12/10/13 /1/14/4/10 /9 /11/14/15 /81 /2 /4 /3 /9 /i255 /71 /4 /66 /1 /8 /4 /5 /80 /i255 /7/8 /4 /3 /9/10/0 /9 /11 /9 /12/10/13 /1/14/4/10 /9 /11/14/15 /78 /3 /9 /4 /5/14/4/70 /1 /11 /5 /80 /i255 /71 /4/66 /1 /8 /4 /5 /80 /i255 /7 /8 /4 /3 /9/10/0 /9 /11 /9 /12/10/13 /1/14/4/10 /9 /11/14/15 /82 /4 /5 /9 /1 /83 /1 /4 /70 /i255 /71 /4 /66 /1 /8 /4 /5/80 /i255 /7 /8 /4 /3 /9/10/0 /9 /11 /9 /12/10/13 /1/14/4/10 /9 /11/14/15 /82 /11 /5 /84 /68 /3 /i255 /82 /68 /15 /80 /i255 /7 /8/4 /3 /9/10/0 /9 /11 /9 /12/10/13 /1/14/4/10 /9 /11/14/15 /85/1/9 /3 /4 /10 /10 /i255 /7 /8 /4 /3 /9 /10 /0 /1 /2 /3 /11 /9 /12 /5/4/13 /1/14/4/10 /9 /11/14/15 /86 /68 /9 /11 /5 /80 /i255 /7 /8 /4 /3 /9 /10/0 /1 /2 /3 /11 /9 /12 /5/4/13 /1/14/4/10 /9 /11/14/15 /7 /3 /8 /4 /66 /68 /15 /4 /i255 /0 /12/14/14/11 /5 /80 /i255 /7 /8 /4 /3 /9/10/0 /9 /11 /9 /12/10/13 /1/14/4/10 /9 /11/14/15/10 /41 /29 /39 /36 /30 /17 /49 /36 /i255 /35 /36 /29 /25 /87 /33 /24 /44 /36 /48 /59 /41 /29 /28 /27 /37 /49 /25 /36/48/58 /59 /54 /59 /54 /57 /54 /61 /i255 /56 /40 /57 /55 /40 /56 /62 /i255 /50 /63 /75 /36 /27 /25 /23 /26 /23 /36 /48 /i255 /20 /36 /30 /23 /39 /36 /27/36/48/35 /36 /28 /21 /27 /23 /25 /37 /i255 /75 /44 /36 /28 /76 /36/48/58 /59 /60 /59 /54 /57 /54 /61 /i255 /62 /40 /61 /57 /40 /56 /60 /i255 /50 /63 /35 /23 /32 /29 /23 /29 /32 /i255 /75 /17/18/49/30 /36/25/36/35 /36 /28 /21 /27 /23 /25 /37 /i255 /75 /44 /36 /28 /76 /36/48/58 /59 /60 /59 /54 /57 /54 /61 /i255 /62 /40 /61 /61 /40 /57 /62 /i255 /50 /63 /75 /17/18/49/30 /36 /25 /36 /48 /35 /36 /28 /21 /27 /23 /25 /37 /i255 /75 /44 /36 /28 /76 /36/48/58 /59 /60 /59 /54 /57 /54 /61 /i255 /62 /40 /61 /61 /40 /57 /62 /i255 /50 /63 /79 /11 /80/14/4/3 /9 /i255 /7 /8 /4 /3 /9 /10 /0 /9 /11 /9 /12/10/13 /1/14/4/10 /9 /11/14/15/10
11.a
Packet Pg. 160
2022 WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM
COMMENCEMENT REPORT
CITY OF PALO ALTO
ATTACHMENT B
APN City/State
1 1605 EDGEWOOD DR 003-12-002 MIAO NINA YANTI 931 CLARA DR PALO ALTO CA 94303-4002 2 136 LOIS LN 003-38-044 HOBSON ELEANOR M TRUSTEE PO BOX 60452 PALO ALTO CA 94306 3 31 PRIMROSE WY 003-40-060 MINNERS BRUCE A TRUSTEE 1610 TEAL POND RD PLACERVILLE CA 95667-9649 4 170 IRIS WY 003-41-008 XIA FAN AND ZHOU YUAN 170 IRIS WAY PALO ALTO CA 94303-3036 5 782 GREER RD 003-41-065 DENG JINGJING AND JIANG LIJUN 782 GREER RD PALO ALTO CA 94303-3022 6 1938 CHANNING AV 003-42-039 HALEY PHILIP H TRUSTEE & ET AL 506 EISENHOWER ST DAVIS CA 95616 7 1071 EMBARCADERO RD 003-42-055 DING KUN 1071 EMBARCADERO RD PALO ALTO CA 94303-3149 8 1031 EMBARCADERO RD 003-42-060 XIAO ZHIHUA AND CHAO SHAN 10181 ADRIANA AVE CUPERTINO CA 95014-1125 9 2385 ST FRANCIS DR 003-48-021 ZADIK YAIR AND LINDA 2385 ST FRANCIS DR PALO ALTO CA 94303-3136 10 2075 LOUIS RD 003-50-021 KELLER JEFFREY R 2075 LOUIS RD PALO ALTO CA 94303-3452 11 946 EL CAJON WY 003-52-057 PILLSBURY HELEN BARKLEY 707 ELM ST UNIT 221 SAN CARLOS CA 94070 12 864 EMBARCADERO RD 003-56-002 CHOI BEN CHUNG-MING TRUSTEE & ET AL 268 CASTRO ST MOUNTAIN VIEW CA 94041-1204 13 742 SOUTHAMPTON DR 003-59-041 AGRAWAL PARAG AND AGARWALA VINEETA 1725 NEWELL RD PALO ALTO CA 94303-2951 14 260 BYRON ST 120-02-030 LIVERIGHT MICHAEL 260 BYRON ST PALO ALTO CA 94301-1307 15 655 EMBARCADERO RD 120-08-023 L S & CO PARTNERSHIP 555 BYRON ST UNIT 105 PALO ALTO CA 94301-1303 16 4102 SUTHERLAND DR 127-16-005 YURCHENCO JAMES R 4102 SUTHERLAND RD PALO ALTO CA 943034-4730 17 733 RAMONA ST 120-27-063 KODA ROSS K TRUSTEE P O BOX 156 SOUTH DOS PALOS CA 93665 18 128 KINGSLEY AV 124-15-038 KHAN ANWAR AND NAYYAR 2341 FALLING WATER CT SANTA CLARA CA 95054-1316 19 3951 SUTHERLAND DR 127-17-014 CHAN ALLAN FUKWAH AND LAM KONGSZE TRUSTEE 3951 SUTHERLAND DR PALO ALTO CA 94303-4726 20 3640 LUPINE AV 127-21-140 LUU JANE AND NG DAVID M 3640 LUPINE AVE PALO ALTO CA 94303-4431 21 3419 CORK OAK WY 127-48-023 SUNNY VENTURE LLC 530 SHOWERS DR UNIT 7-229 MOUNTAIN VIEW CA 94040 22 454 COLORADO AV 132-08-105 RAMCHANDRAN ADESH 1011 BLUFF RD GLENCOE IL 60022 23 464 COLORADO AV 132-08-115 CHUANG SUHCHU 142 PARK AVE PALO ALTO CA 94306-1107 24 2671 BRYANT ST 132-13-056 FEINLEIB DAVID A TRUSTEE & ET AL 415 MOSCOW ST SAN FRANCISCO CA 94112 25 2660 BRYANT ST 132-18-088 HUANG YIFEI CHARLES AND WEI XIAOBO SHERRY T 2660 BRYANT ST PALO ALTO CA 94306-2306 26 2808 BRYANT ST 132-19-001 SIT AHFUNG STEVEN AND CHAN AMY MEI LING 2808 BRYANT ST PALO ALTO CA 94306-2329 27 3120 COWPER ST 132-20-155 VALENTINE MARY E 3120 COWPER ST PALO ALTO CA 94306-3001 28 3533 RAMONA ST 132-22-097 TANG DEXTER CHIHUNG TRUSTEE & ET AL 3533 RAMONA ST PALO ALTO CA 94306-3549 29 3541 BRYANT ST 132-23-033 KAPOSHILIN NICHOLAS TRUSTEE 936 N CALIFORNIA AVE PALO ALTO CA 94303-3405 30 84 ROOSEVELT CL 132-23-055 LEUNG JOHN KA YU AND JOANNA KONG TRUSTEE PO BOX 5358 SAN MATEO CA 94402-0358 31 76 ROOSEVELT CL 132-23-059 LIU JENKUEI TRUSTEE & ET AL 4039 SCRIPPS AVE PALO ALTO CA 94306-4535 32 179 EL DORADO AV 132-25-021 SIMONINI CORINNE P TRUSTEE 3075 PONTE MORINO DR APT 107 CAMERON PARK CA 95682-8290 33 2876 EMERSON ST 132-26-006 HSU YEN-FEN TRUSTEE 2876 EMERSON ST PALO ALTO CA 94306-2350 34 2886 EMERSON ST 132-26-007 LUCA DARIO LLC 395 DEL MONTE CTR STE 222 MONTEREY CA 93940 35 11 ROOSEVELT CL 132-29-014 QI FENG AND CHEN CHENG-NA 11 ROOSEVELT CIR PALO ALTO CA 94306-4217 36 34 ROOSEVELT CL 132-29-061 LYONS CHARLES P TRUSTEE & ET AL 34 ROOSEVELT CIR PALO ALTO CA 94306-4216 37 18 ROOSEVELT CL 132-29-069 BERNSTEIN AMIR D TRUSTEE 18 ROOSEVELT CIR PALO ALTO CA 94306 38 3780 WRIGHT PL 132-30-017 AXELROD HERBERT AND FUMIKO 3780 WRIGHT PL PALO ALTO CA 94306-4262 39 3732 STARR KING CL 132-30-023 RIPLEY MARY ALICE TRUSTEE 3732 STARR KING CIR PALO ALTO CA 94306-4260 40 3738 STARR KING CL 132-30-024 PARK YOUNGCHUL AND KIM EUN HA 3738 STARR KING CIR PALO ALTO CA 94306-4260 41 3830 CARLSON CL 132-30-058 CHENG JING ET AL 3830 CARLSON CIR PALO ALTO CA 94306-4224 Situs
Santa Clara County Weed Abatement Program Page 1 of 3
11.b
Packet Pg. 161
2022 WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM
COMMENCEMENT REPORT
CITY OF PALO ALTO
ATTACHMENT B
42 132-33-060 Linda Allen Sr. Property Manager-AT&T 1700 Space Park Dr. SANTA CLARA CA 95054 43 289 FERNANDO AV 132-34-015 ZHU MICHAEL AND ZHAO KATHERINE 293 BEATRICE ST MOUNTAIN VIEW CA 94043-4462 44 231 FERNANDO AV 132-34-019 GOODRICH EVELYN L AND GEORGE M TRUSTEE 231 FERNANDO AVE PALO ALTO CA 94306-2815 45 3550 PARK BL 132-34-023 BLACKMAN MARTHA E TRUSTEE & ET AL 3550 PARK BLVD PALO ALTO CA 94306-2850 46 220 MATADERO AV 132-34-025 AJLOUN ENTERPRISES LLC 186 CAMELIA DR DALY CITY CA 94015 47 3675 PARK BL 132-34-045 BASLER JOSHUA R 3675 PARK BLVD PALO ALTO CA 94306-2853 48 3605 PARK BL 132-34-050 ENABLING STRATEGIES LIMITED 3605 PARK BLVD PALO ALTO CA 94306-2853 49 3561 PARK BL 132-34-052 MAHAL JASWINDER 180 PARK SHARON DR SAN JOSE CA 95136-2535 50 210 WILTON AV 132-35-012 CHASE WILTON LLC 3024 ROSS RD PALO ALTO CA 94303-4102 51 443 WILTON AV 132-35-027 ATASHBAND BAHRAM 443 WILTON AVE PALO ALTO CA 94306-2859 52 419 WILTON AV 132-35-031 BOSTROM VALERIE C TRUSTEE 419 WILTON AVE PALO ALTO CA 94306-2859 53 365 WILTON AV 132-35-033 SHAWNEE LAURA A ET AL 365 WILTON AVE PALO ALTO CA 94306 54 215 WILTON AV 132-35-042 GODSHALL KELVIN V ET AL 215 WILTON AVE PALO ALTO CA 94306-2855 55 2755 EL CAMINO REAL 132-36-084 WHPV ALTA LOCALE LLC 530 EMERSON ST STE 150 PALO ALTO CA 94301 56 415 FERNANDO AV 132-39-038 BROWN JONATHAN S AND MIRIAM M 415 FERNANDO AVE PALO ALTO CA 94306-2820 57 452 FERNANDO AV 132-39-083 CHANG FANG CHIAN TRUSTEE & ET AL 1150 SAGUARE TER FREMONT CA 94539 58 389 MATADERO AV 132-40-053 MAHANY GARY W AND KEMP SUSAN A TRUSTEE 389 MATADERO AVE PALO ALTO CA 94306-2833 59 4032 PARK BL 132-43-025 ZHU LI AND WAN FANNY TRUSTEE 33345 7TH ST UNION CITY CA 94587 60 3130 RAMONA ST 132-48-033 DING ZHIMIN AND ZHU XINYI 3130 RAMONA ST PALO ALTO CA 94306-2922 61 689 WELLSBURY WY 132-56-059 ZHU ZHIMING AND HE XIAOYING 689 WELLSBURY WAY PALO ALTO CA 94306-2528 62 613 STANFORD AV 137-01-059 BAUMANN JOHN R 613 STANFORD AVE PALO ALTO CA 94306-1412 63 2150 YALE ST 137-01-134 LIANG KE 33206 FALCON DR FREMONT CA 94555 64 2321 WELLESLEY ST 137-02-024 CULPEPPER BENJAMIN J 335 PANORAMIC WAY BERKELEY CA 94704 65 2320 WELLESLEY ST 137-02-026 WHITELEY MARK A AND TRINA L TRUSTEE 2320 WELLESLEY ST PALO ALTO CA 94306-1337 66 1082 COLLEGE AV 137-03-036 1080CAPA LLC 3028 SCOTT BLVD UNIT C SANTA CLARA CA 95054 67 2017 OBERLIN ST 137-03-047 STANFORD JEWISH CENTER INC 1289 COLLEGE AVE PALO ALTO CA 94306-1345 68 2276 HARVARD ST 137-05-016 BUSSEY JASON M AND SACHIKO 2276 HARVARD ST PALO ALTO CA 94306-1351 69 2195 COLUMBIA ST 137-06-036 EDELMAN ANDREA TRUSTEE 2195 COLUMBIA ST PALO ALTO CA 94306-1233 70 3700 EL CAMINO REAL 137-11-078 KSS INVESTMENT LLC 1380 MIRAVALLE AVE LOS ALTOS CA 94024-5744 71 3793 LA DONNA AV 137-12-016 MEHTA BIJAL AND PALLAVI TRUSTEE 3793 LA DONNA AVE PALO ALTO CA 94306-3151 72 721 BARRON AV 137-13-042 ASHWORTH DARREN AND IMANE 705 BARRON AVE PALO ALTO CA 94306-3108 73 3890 LA DONNA AV 137-13-059 ZHAO RUXIONG AND BAI HUA 3890 LA DONNA AVE PALO ALTO CA 94306-3156 74 4146 EL CAMINO REAL 137-24-034 JUAN CHUNG-CHIUNG AND SU CHEN TRUSTEE 6 ATHERTON OAKS LN ATHERTON CA 94027 75 567 MAYBELL AV 137-25-134 WANG YUNBING TRUSTEE & ET AL 567 MAYBELL AVE PALO ALTO CA 94306 76 569 MAYBELL AV 137-25-135 GOLDEN GATE HOMES LLC 2225 E BAYSHORE RD STE 200 PALO ALTO CA 94303 77 575 MAYBELL AV 137-25-136 GOLDEN GATE HOMES LLC 2225 E BAYSHORE RD STE 200 PALO ALTO CA 94303 78 587 MAYBELL AV 137-25-137 GOLDEN GATE HOMES LLC 2225 E BAYSHORE RD STE 200 PALO ALTO CA 94303 79 4101 CLEMO AV 137-25-138 GOLDEN GATE HOMES LLC 2225 E BAYSHORE RD STE 200 PALO ALTO CA 94303 80 4103 CLEMO AV 137-25-139 GOLDEN GATE HOMES LLC 2225 E BAYSHORE RD STE 200 PALO ALTO CA 94303 81 4121 ORCHARD ST 137-25-140 GOLDEN GATE HOMES LLC 2225 E BAYSHORE RD STE 200 PALO ALTO CA 94303 82 4123 ORCHARD ST 137-25-141 GOLDEN GATE HOMES LLC 2225 E BAYSHORE RD STE 200 PALO ALTO CA 94303 83 4131 ORCHARD ST 137-25-142 GOLDEN GATE HOMES LLC 2225 E BAYSHORE RD STE 200 PALO ALTO CA 94303 84 4135 ORCHARD ST 137-25-143 GOLDEN GATE HOMES LLC 2225 E BAYSHORE RD STE 200 PALO ALTO CA 94303 Santa Clara County Weed Abatement Program Page 2 of 3
11.b
Packet Pg. 162
2022 WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM
COMMENCEMENT REPORT
CITY OF PALO ALTO
ATTACHMENT B
85 4139 ORCHARD ST 137-25-144 GOLDEN GATE HOMES LLC 2225 E BAYSHORE RD STE 200 PALO ALTO CA 94303 86 4150 ORCHARD ST 137-25-145 GOLDEN GATE HOMES LLC 2225 E BAYSHORE RD STE 200 PALO ALTO CA 94303 87 4158 ORCHARD ST 137-25-146 GOLDEN GATE HOMES LLC 2225 E BAYSHORE RD STE 200 PALO ALTO CA 94303 88 4168 ORCHARD ST 137-25-147 GOLDEN GATE HOMES LLC 2225 E BAYSHORE RD STE 200 PALO ALTO CA 94303 89 4178 ORCHARD ST 137-25-148 GOLDEN GATE HOMES LLC 2225 E BAYSHORE RD STE 200 PALO ALTO CA 94303 90 4188 ORCHARD ST 137-25-149 GOLDEN GATE HOMES LLC 2225 E BAYSHORE RD STE 200 PALO ALTO CA 94303 91 649 MAYBELL AV 137-27-036 DANG LI CHU AND LAO LILIAN 649 MAYBELL AVE PALO ALTO CA 94306-3817 92 4137 DONALD DR 137-27-051 ZELLER MATTHIAS AND KAREN A 4137 DONALD DR PALO ALTO CA 94306-3823 93 4130 DONALD DR 137-27-086 HSI HSING-HUI 4130 DONALD DR PALO ALTO CA 94306-3822 94 3460 HILLVIEW RD 142-16-059 LELAND STANFORD JR UNIV THE BD 26 N EUCLID AVE PASADENA CA 91101 95 1050 ARASTRADERO RD 142-16-060 LELAND STANFORD JR UNIV BD 300 PASTEUR DR STANFORD CA 94305-5132 96 3495 DEER CREEK RD 142-16-062 LELAND STANFORD JR UNIV BOARD 150 PORTOLA RD PORTOLA VALLEY CA 94025 97 3500 DEER CREEK RD 142-16-066 LELAND STANFORD JR UNIVERSITY BOARD OF TR 3500 DEER CREEK RD PALO ALTO CA 94304 98 1000 PAGE MILL RD 142-20-091 LELAND STANFORD JR UNIVERSITY BOARD OF TR 965 PAGE MILL RD PALO ALTO CA 94304 99 4206 DARLINGTON CT 148-03-037 FERREIRA KAVITHA AND JOAO CARLOS LEITE 4206 DARLINGTON CT PALO ALTO CA 94306-4129 100 4201 PARK BL 148-03-060 BORDIA ANUPAM AND SURBHI 4201 PARK BLVD PALO ALTO CA 94306-4144 101 148 MONROE DR 148-06-001 SEHRAWAT VARUN AND PRERNA TRUSTEE 6602 PARA WAY UNIT 24 PLAYA VISTA CA 90094 102 4388 SILVA CT 148-12-028 YIN JUN AND DUANMU LAN 4388 SILVA CT PALO ALTO CA 94306-4422 103 633 ARASTRADERO RD 167-06-016 STONE VIRGINIA A AND BRADLEY K TRUSTEE 3516 BAJAMONT WAY CARMICHAEL CA 95608 104 639 ARASTRADERO RD 167-06-063 FIRM GROUND REAL ESTATE PO BOX 51871 PALO ALTO CA 94303 105 4179 OAK HILL AV 175-01-025 BACHRACH SYLVIA RASHMI TRUSTEE & ET AL 12 STAR WAY MOUNTAIN VIEW CA 94040 106 4169 OAK HILL AV 175-01-026 BACHRACH SYLVIA R TRUSTEE 12 STARR WAY MOUNTAIN VIEW CA 94040 107 849 MESA AV 175-01-037 TLT LLC PO BOX 1667 PALO ALTO CA 94302 108 4243 MANUELA CT 175-02-053 WEAKLAND ALAN TRUSTEE & ET AL 515 S FLOWER ST FLOOR 25 LOS ANGELES CA 90071 109 4103 OLD TRACE RD 175-20-078 SMITHWICK ALTON D AND URSULA L TRUSTEE PO BOX 60065 PALO ALTO CA 94306 110 890 MOCKINGBIRD LN 175-20-082 JOSHI VIVEK TRUSTEE & ET AL 890 MOCKINGBIRD LN PALO ALTO CA 94306-3719 111 895 MOCKINGBIRD LN 175-20-086 WOLF ELIZABETH B TRUSTEE 895 MOCKINGBIRD LN PALO ALTO CA 94306-3719 112 OLD ADOBE RD 175-20-092 WATERS CHRISTOPHER J TRUSTEE & ET AL 609 ARBOLEDA DR LOS ALTOS CA 94024 113 4150 OLD ADOBE RD 175-20-105 HAO HSIEH T AND MING C TRUSTEE 4150 OLD ADOBE RD PALO ALTO CA 94306-3726 114 4155 OLD ADOBE RD 175-20-110 VILKIN PETER D TRUSTEE 673 MAYBELL AVE PALO ALTO CA 94306-3817 115 3000 ALEXIS DR 182-35-035 PALO ALTO HILLS GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB INC 3000 ALEXIS DR PALO ALTO CA 94304-1303 116 3130 ALEXIS DR 182-43-024 VON CLEMM PETER F AND JENNIFER J 3130 ALEXIS DR PALO ALTO CA 94304-1305 117 951 LAUREL GLEN DR 182-49-004 BOGERTY SHARON D 951 LAUREL GLEN DR PALO ALTO CA 94304-1323 Santa Clara County Weed Abatement Program Page 3 of 3
11.b
Packet Pg. 163
City of Palo Alto Weed Abatement
The City of Palo Alto contracts with the Santa Clara County Department of Agriculture and Environmental Management (SCCDAEM) to remove and destroy weeds in its efforts to mitigate potential fire hazards (as defined in Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 8.08). The entire weed abatement program is coordinated by the SCCDAEM. Abatement proceedings must follow a legally established course. This is an annual process with weed abatement occurring in late Spring. City of Palo Alto involvement is limited to the following 3 steps for City Council:
1) (Nov-Dec) City of Palo Alto Declares Weeds a Nuisance to allow for County abatement and sets a later date (Jan-Feb) for a public hearing to review the Annual Commencement Report (list of” nuisance” parcels).
2) (Jan-Feb) Public Hearing to review the Annual Commencement Report and approve the County abatement proceedings. At this public hearing, property owners may appear and object to the proposed weed destruction or removal. After the hearing and consideration of any objections, the Council may sustain or overrule any or all objections. Upon adoption of the resolution confirming the weed abatement commencement report and ordering weed nuisances abated, the County will be asked to perform the abatement work to destroy and remove any weeds. 3) (June) Public Hearing to approve the invoices for the abatement work performed by the SCCDAEM.
The Santa Clara County Weed Abatement Program
The Santa Clara County Department of Agriculture and Environmental Management and the City of Palo Alto work together to protect our community from fire. The purpose of the Weed Abatement Program is to prevent fire hazards posed by vegetative overgrowth and the accumulation of combustible materials.
Typically, a property is placed on the program list by a County Weed Abatement Inspector who identifies a potential fire hazard on the property. The Palo Alto Fire Department (PAFD) & Code Enforcement also report addresses of concern and forward (verified) complaints from residents to the SCCDAEM. Residents can report addresses of concern to PAFD, code enforcement, or directly to the County Weed Abatement Program.
Santa Clara County program staff annually inspect “nuisance” parcels at the beginning of the fire season, which is typically April 30
th for CPA parcels.
The Weed Abatement program is entirely funded from fees charged to residents. All parcels on the list will be charged a basic inspection fee. If the parcel is not in compliance at the time of inspection, the property owner will be charged a n additional failed inspection fee, and they will receive a final courtesy notice as a reminder to abate their weeds within 2 weeks.
If the weeds are not abated by the property owner, the work will be completed by the County contractor. The property owner will pay the contractor’s fees plus a County administrative fee.
All fees will be included in their property tax bill.
Attachment C 11.c
Packet Pg. 164
Properties that meet and maintain the minimum fire safety standards will only be charged for the annual fee. These properties will be removed from the list after three years of compliance.
11.c
Packet Pg. 165
City of Palo Alto (ID # 14071)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 2/28/2022
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Grand Jury Report Responses
Title: Discussion and Direction on Draft Response to the Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report Published December 16, 2021 Pertaining to Affordable Housing and Potential Direction to Staff on Related Policies .
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Development Services
This report will be a special late packet release on Thursday, February 24th, 2022. 12 Packet Pg. 166
City of Palo Alto (ID # 14066)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 2/28/2022
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: California Avenue Temporary and Permanent Street Closure Discussion
Title: California Avenue and Ramona Street Temporary and Permanent Closure: Direct Staff to Issue RFP for a Feasibility Study and Return for Contract Approval, and Provide D irection to Staff on Activities and Programming (Continued from the February 7, 2022 meeting) From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Development Services
** This item was continued from the February 7, 2022 meeting
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the City Council:
I. Direct staff to issue a Request for Information (RFI) and/or Request For Proposals (RFP) to obtain a consultant to conduct a feasibility study to define the scope and understand the impact of the proposed permanent closure(s) on portions of California Avenue from El Camino Real to Park Blvd. and the section of Ramona Street between Hamilton Avenue and University Avenue.
II. Direct staff to return to Council for approval of the contract for the feasibility study and to provide a schedule.
III. Discuss and provide direction regarding activities in the temporarily closed portion of California Avenue (from El Camino Real to Park Blvd.).
Executive Summary:
This report provides information o n next steps that would be necessary to evaluate and determine the feasibility of moving forward with permanent closure(s) of portions of California Avenue and Ramona Street and seeks the City Council’s direction on next steps.
Background:
13 Packet Pg. 167
City of Palo Alto Page 2
On September 13, 2021, City Council authorized staff to extend the closure of California Avenue and Ramona Street through June 2022 (CMR 13540). At the same Council meeting, the Council directed staff to return for discussion on the permanent street closures. On June 22, 2021, Council also directed staff to return to the City Council for further discussion rega rding additional elements on the California Ave street closure , referring to the area closed through June 2022 for outdoor retail and dining (CMR 12354 ). Specifically, Council directed “Staff to include in its workplan for streetscape design on California Avenue, have Staff return with a process recommendation to pursue a pro -bono design expertise such as AIA, ARB or others, and to include an evaluation of potential sites for permanent performance stages in other potential areas such as downtown.”
Discussion:
City Council directed staff to return for a discussion on permanent street closures . This report outlines the next steps that would be necessary to proceed forward. While the City’s authority to close streets to vehicular traffic is regulated by the State, the decision to pursue closure of a street under the prescribed state processes rests with the Palo Alto C ity Council. The policy decision incorporates balancing numerous factors to determine the avenue most appropriate for the City. To aid Council in its discussion, staff have outlined several policy considerations.
Community and Economic Recovery
The closu re of certain public streets to vehicular traffic was a step taken by the City Council near the beginning of the pandemic to provide outdoor areas for retail, dining, and other activities (gyms, etc.) . These efforts help maintain access to local goods, ser vices, and dining.
The closures of certain streets also aided some businesses in remaining open, especially restaurants, because patrons could dine outdoors.
While the pandemic is not “over”, experts have suggested due to highly effective vaccines, the pandemic is shifting into a new phase. In this phase, Americans are working to re -establish normalcy; and normalcy itself has adjusted. The experiment with closed streets proved to be very popular with Palo Alto residents, with thousands corresponding to Co uncil requesting the street closures continue. Continuation of the closures temporarily and contemplation of permanent closures may represent a “new normal” in Palo Alto. Not only loved by many in the community, the potential new normal provides economic b enefits to local businesses, especially restaurants. Not only because it creates an enhanced opportunity for al fresco dining, but also because the closed portions of streets contribute to a strong sense of place that attracts diners and shoppers alike, he lping generate businesses activity (that in turn generates tax revenue).
Maintaining Access
Council is aware, however, that all businesses do not benefit equally from street closures. As the City explores this topic, Council may consider various combina tions of closing portions of 13 Packet Pg. 168
City of Palo Alto Page 3
California Avenue and Ramona Street. The closures may be 24 hours a day , 7 days a week (ongoing and continuous), the closures might occur regularly during certain hours (weekends), or the ultimate decision could result in maint aining some vehicular access but significantly decreasing the right of way available for motorized vehicles.
In each of these options, the City should aim to improve the conditions for all stakeholders — from restaurants to retailers, grocery stores to fin ancial institutions. Ensuring that customers of all abilities and transportation modes can continue to access goods and services throughout the areas is important and can be accomplished through careful and thoughtful planning.
Use of Public Space
One of the overarching policy decisions for the Council is how the City should use its public space. There are at least two dimensions of this decision. First, who will be occupying the street? Some cities are closing streets for pedestrian activities, others to promote economic activity. Second, the City will want to determine if and how to allow the use of this public space by private businesses. During the pandemic, the City has allowed the use of public space by private establishments through no cost encroach ment permits. If the streets are closed on a more permanent basis, the City will need to determine if space can continue to be used by private establishments and the terms of that use.
These specific decisions do not need to be resolved immediately , as t he first overall choice is whether or not to investigate permanent closures. Yet, being clear that a potential use of public right of way by private establishments that provide goods or services is a likely use of spaces , allows staff to work with consulta nts and other experts as well as stakeholders in future discussions.
Future choices related to this include establishing the cost of using public space; establishing a permitting process for use of public space; and determining procedures to ensure that even if some portions of road include private uses, that the public has ample access to enjoy the street.
The City’s authority to close streets to vehicular traffic is regulated by the State. The State has preempted the entire field of traffic control (Ve hicle Code Section 21). As a result, the right of local authorities to make changes affecting traffic flow, such as closing a street, must be derived from an express delegation of authority from the State. Staff explored various statutes that allow for such authority to the local agencies. The following statutes describe the authority that allows local agencies to close streets on a temporary or permanent basis:
• Temporary Street Closures (including regular/frequent closures on long-term basis)
The State of California’s Vehicle Code (CVC) 21101 (e): CVC Section 21101(e) allows for local authorities to temporarily close a portion of any street f or celebrations, parades, local special events, and other purposes by adoption of a resolution when the closing is 13 Packet Pg. 169
City of Palo Alto Page 4
necessary for the safety and protection of persons who are to use that portion of the street during the temporary closing. The current closur e of street is temporary as a result of the State of Emergency due to the COVID -19 pandemic and the need to support the economic recovery of the businesses on California Street, Ramona Avenue, and University Avenue.
With regards to the permanent closure of streets, s taff will consider various available statutes within the State Codes that delegate to the City the authority to permanently close streets. The first step in this process will be conducting a feasibility study, which will help staff determine which statute might be the most feasible.
For reference, the different state statutes describing the process for road closures are listed as follows:
• Permanent Street Closures
i. The State of California’s Streets and Highways Code 11100 et seq . Provides local agencies with the authority to establish pedestrian malls and to prohibit, in whole or in part, traffic on a pedestrian mall. The legislature found that in certain areas in cities and particularly in retail shopping areas, there is need to separate pedestrian travel from vehicular travel and that such separation is necessary to protect the public safety or otherw ise to serve the public interest and convenience. The legislature further found that such objective can, in part, be accomplished by the establishment of pedestrian malls pursuant to this part.
ii. The State of California’s Vehicle Code (CVC) 21101(a): CVC 21101 (a) allows for the permanent closure of a street if the City Council adopts an ordinance or resolution that finds the street is no longer needed for vehicular traffic.
iii. The State of California’s Vehicle Code (CVC) 21101 ( f): CVC 21101 ( f) allows for the permanent closure of the streets and prohibiting entry to, or exit from, or both, from any street by means of islands, curbs, traffic barriers, or other roadway design features to implement the circulation element of a general plan adopted pursuant to Article 6 (commencing with Section 65350) of Chapter 3 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code. The rules and regulations authorized by this subdivision shall be consistent with the responsibility of local government to provide for the health and safety of its citizens.
iv. The State of California’s AB 773: Recently, on October 6, 2021 , the California Legislature passed the Assembly Bill 773 to create a new CVC Section 21101 (f) to authorize a local authority to adopt a rule or regulation by ordinance for 13 Packet Pg. 170
City of Palo Alto Page 5
implementing a slow stre ets program. This legislation became effective in January 2022. For purposes of this section, a “slow streets program” may include closures to vehicular traffic or through vehicular traffic of neighborhood local streets with connections to citywide bicyc le networks; destinations, such as a business district, that are within walking distance; or green space. A local authority therefore may implement a slow streets program by adopting an ordinance that provides for the closing of streets to vehicular traffi c or limiting access and speed on a street using roadway design features, including, but not limited to, islands, curbs, or traffic barriers.
Street Closure Next Steps:
Feasibility Study: In order to initiate permanent street closure, staff recommends conducting a feasibility study to define the scope and to understand the impact of the proposed closure. This exercise shall also include developing conceptual plans with possible alternatives. The feasibility study shall review the existing conditions, t raffic circulation, and its impacts to access for properties in the proposed segments. The traffic analysis shall include but is not limited to analysis of traffic circulation, access to properties, emergency access, parking, loading -unloading, delivery, a ccess for maintenance of utilities, impacts to signal operations, etc. Parking impacts in the area and surrounding areas will need to be studied. In addition, the feasibility study can also include economic analysis to determine the potential impacts on b usiness based on similar implementations in other cities. Outreach to stakeholders and the public should also be considered as part of this feasibility study.
The feasibility study may include a component to review the impacts of long -term temporary closures such as seasonal closures or regular weekend closures, in the event such options are considered for implementation.
Environmental Documentation Review & Preparation: After reviewing the feasibility study and selection of preferred closure option b y City Council , the next step will be consideration and preparation of the required environmental approval necessary under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Resolution of Intent & Public Hearing: The next step in the process is the adoption o f resolution of intent which sets a public hearing date for the consideration of the street closure. The public hearing date must be set for at least 90 days after the adoption of the resolution of intent.
Adoption of the Ordinance: The last step is the introduction of an ordinance to establish the pedestrian mall and any related regulations governing the use of the roadway. Any 13 Packet Pg. 171
City of Palo Alto Page 6
objections from the abutting property owners must be resolved , and the majority of property owners must not object to moving forward on street closure.
Placemaking, such as determining possible locations for permanent performance stages, would occur after a feasibility study during conceptual plan development of the street closure.
Considerations such as responsibility for progra mming, design, and operating costs will also need to be addressed.
Actions on Similar Permanent Street Closures in Other Nearby Cities As the Council considers whether or not to pursue longer -term closures, the actions of nearby cities may provide insi ght. Staff reviewed actions of several neighboring cities and provide a summary below.
• City of Mountain View: On October 12, 2021, the City Council of Mountain View conducted a study session to review the Castro Street Pedestrian Mall Feasibility Study.
The City was considering closure of Castro Street prior to the pandemic and was authorized to conduct a feasibility study on December 10, 2019 ( link to City of Mountain View staff report).
• City of San Mateo: On September 20, 2021, City Council adopted a resolution to establish pedestrian malls on B Street between 1st and 2nd Avenues and on B Street between 2 nd and 3 rd Avenues and introduced an Ordin ance to amend the San Mateo Municipal Code to establish rules and regulations governing pedestrian malls (link to City of San Mateo staff report ). The public hearing for resolution of intent to establish a pedestrian mall was conducted on June 21, 2021.
• The City and County of San Francisco has considered making some residential low - volume streets as “Slow Streets” in post -pandemic times. The information about San Francisco’s Slow Street program can be found at San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) Post Pandemic Slow Street Program.
Temporary California Avenue Street Closures
Currently, California Avenue from El Camino Real to Birch Street remains closed to vehicular traffic. The Public Works Department continues to work with permit holders to ensure t heir temporary facilities (tables, chairs, canopies, etc.) comply with standards established by the City. Staff recommend continuing to allow the permit holders to continue as -is as the exploration of permanent closure continues. This allows staff energies to focus on that effort.
Stakeholders have provided testimony to City Council regarding a desire for more aesthetic cohesion among the establishments. Creating more cohesion would require aesthetic 13 Packet Pg. 172
City of Palo Alto Page 7
standards, new applications, review of compliance with the standards, and possibly installation of new temporary facilities by private establishments. S taff recommends focusing California Avenue energies on the design of the permanent parklet program as well as other public and privately-owned street features. Working with the ARB, local businesses, and community members, the City can create a unique permanent parklet program that enhances the streetscape and pedestrian environment along California Avenue. This discussion could also include consideration of minor streetscape improvements that take into account the significant investment already made in the recent California Avenue Streetscape project.
The permanent closure, if ultimately pursued, could and likely should include development of aesthetic guidelines leading to an even stronger sense of place on California Avenue. The timing of the development of these guidelines may be best placed as part of the permanent closure discussion, instead of the temporary program.
In the interim, the City may continue to collaborate with the local business community by providing street cleaning services, tree and shrub maintenance, public safety services, and by facilitating events and attractions. In the past, public art has been used to attract visitors, the city is currently collaborating with local merchants to place seasonal winter decorations on Cal Ave. Efforts to facilitate public performances of music can also be undertaken in collaboration.
In sum, staff recommend focusing in the short term on flexible opport unities for collaboration that do not entail major capital outlay for the City or for permit holders. Likewise, focusing energies of the Office of Transportation on the exploration of the permanent closure and the energy of Planning and Development Services—and other departments—along with ARB on the permanent parklet standards, can ensure that public resources are sequentially allocated.
Perhaps more simply put: establishing long term standards for what remains a temporary closure may be ill-timed.
Policy Implications:
Overall, the street closure topic reflects a decision about how best to use public space, in this case, the public roadways. Key considerations include determining if the space will include facilities for pedestrians and bicycles and if pr ivate businesses will be charged to utilize the public space.
Resource Impact:
The permanent street closure of California Ave nue and Ramona Street is not currently included in the Office of Transportation Work Plan or F Y 2022 budget. Should Council wish t o pursue studying the feasibility of any street closure options, reprioritization of current work and staff augmentation through contract consultant and additional budgetary amount authority will be necessary. Staff estimates the additional amount to range from $300K -$500K for conducting 13 Packet Pg. 173
City of Palo Alto Page 8
this feasibility study. Staff will return to Council for review and approval of any such contract before awarding.
Regarding the ongoing street closures that are set to continue through June 2022, the City is challenged t o consider how to best allocate existing staff resources to achieve City Council priorities. Community and economic recovery remains a key Council priority in 2021. To further this priority, staff recommend focusing resources on the long term parklet stand ards. These standards, if adopted, could enhance and enliven California Avenue in 2022 and beyond.
If Council seeks additional efforts for the current closure area, staff request guidance. Staff may return with a resource request depending on the directi on expressed by City Council. If funds are allocated, time and availability of human resources —both staff and consultant —may delay the commencement of assigned work.
Timeline:
Staff will initiate an RFI/RFP process following Council approval and return f or review and approval of the contract.
Stakeholder Engagement:
The opinions of stakeholders have not shifted significantly since the Council’s last discussion of this matter. Generally speaking, owners of restaurants located within the closed streets al ong Ramona Street and on California Avenue prefer the closures. Due to the rise in delta variant, they report that fewer diners want to eat indoors. Likewise, retail and retail -like uses generally prefer the streets be opened to vehicular traffic. These businesses feel restaurants have had a chance to use the streets and that now, more balance is needed. These businesses also point out that through parklets , these restaurants can continue outdoor meal service. Retailers continue to report diminished sales a nd indicate the street closure contributes to these decreased sale volumes. While there are fewer retailers in the Cal Ave closure, retailers within and around the closure report challenges they attribute to the closure. Palo Alto residents continue to support continuation of the street closures.
With the onset of the COVID -19 pandemic in early 2020, the City Council authorized the creation of a Temporary Outdoor Dining program , including the approval of the temporary closure of portions of California Ave nue, University Avenue, and Ramona Street. Uplift Local, a Council-supported effort enabling outdoor dining, retail, personal services, and outdoor gyms and fitness options in business districts such as California Avenue and the downtown core and other bus iness areas throughout Palo Alto was created. A dedicated Uplift Local website provided information to the community. This program c ontinues to evolve based on business and community input. Staff has been meeting with the community regularly to seek feedback from the business owners and residents to address concerns associated with outdoor dining program and street closures. While ther e are fewer retailers in the Cal Ave closure, retailers 13 Packet Pg. 174
City of Palo Alto Page 9
within and around the closure report challenges they attribute to the closure. Palo Alto residents continue to support continuation of the street closures.
However, d uring the study of the feasibilit y of permanent closure, additional stakeholder outreach will be necessary.
Environmental Review:
The proposed action is part of a planning study for a possible future action, which has not been approved, adopted, or funded and is therefore exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15262. The future decision to approve the construction would be subject to CEQA and require the preparation of an environmental analysis. Environmental review and proje ct design will be performed in the subsequent steps of the project development.
13 Packet Pg. 175
2 /17/2022
Schedule of Meetings
Published February 17, 2022
This is a courtesy notice only. Meeting dates, times, and locations are subject to change. Almost all Palo Alto Council and some Standing Committee meetings are cablecast live on C hannel 26. If there happe ns to be concurrent meetings, one meeting will be broadcast on Channel 29.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 17
Public Art Commission Meeting, 7 p.m.
MON
DAY, FEBRUARY 21
City Council Meeting, 6 p.m. (CA NCELLE D DUE TO H OLIDAY ) TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 22
Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting, 7 p.m.
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 23
Planning & Transportation Commission Meeting, 6 p.m.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 24
Historic Resources Board Meeting, 8:30 a.m.
MON
DAY, FEBRUARY 28
Sp. City Council Meeting, 5 p.m.
TUESDAY, MARCH 1
Sp. Finance Committee Meeting, 5:30 p.m.
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 2
Sp. Utilities Advisory Committee Meeting (Virtual Only), 6 p.m.
THURSDAY, MARCH 3
Architectural Review Board Meeting, 8:30 a.m.
MONDAY, MARCH 7
Sp. City Council Meeting, 5 p.m.
TUESDAY, MARCH 8
Policy & Services Committee Meeting, 7 p.m.
WE
DNESDAY, MARCH 9
Planning & Transportation Commission Meeting, 6 p.m.
THURSDAY, MARCH 10
Historic Resources Board Meeting, 8:30 a.m.
Human Relations Commission Meeting, 6 p.m.
MONDAY, MARCH 14
Sp. City Council Meeting, 5 p.m.
Persons with di sabilities who require auxilia ry aids or services in using City facilities or programs, or who would like information on the City’s compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact: ADA Coordinator, City of Palo Alto, 650 -329-2550 (voice) or 329-1199 (TDD), [email protected]. Listening assistive devices are availabl e in the Council Chambers. Sign language interpreters will be provided upon request with 72 hours advance notice. Please advise the City Clerk's Office (650-329-2571) of meetings or changes by 3:00 p.m. on Wednesdays for inclusion in the following week’s schedule.
14.a
Packet Pg. 176
City of Palo Alto (ID # 13976)
Office of the City Clerk
City Council CAO Report
Meeting Date: 2/28/2022
Title: Appointment of 2022 Emergency Standby Council
From: Lesley Milton, City Clerk
Staff recommends the City Council approve the selection of the following former Council Members to serve as members of the 2022 Emergency Standby Council:
• Greg Scharff
• Greg Schmid
• Nancy Shepherd
• Bern Beecham
• Lanie Wheeler
• Peter Druckmeier
• Larry Klein *
BACKGROUND
The Charter of the City of Palo Alto provides that , "the Council may , by Ordinance or Resolution, provide for the preservation and continuation of governme nt in the event of disaster which renders unavailable a majority of the Council."
On August 7, 2006, the City Council adopted amendments to Section 2.12.090 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code regarding the selection procedure for the City's Emergency Standby Council. The adopted policy states that the Council shall consider the following criteria for appointments to the Emergency Standby Council:
residency in the City of Palo Alto, availability, interest in serving and a lack of conflicts of interest.
Seven members serve on the Emergency Standby Council. Members of the Standby Council have the authority delegated to them under Chapter 2.12 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. The members of the Emergency Standby Council continue to serve until the Council appoints or reappoints the members at the beginning of each year.
*Still waiting on formal confirmation to serve, will have by meeting date Packet Pg. 177
City of Palo Alto (ID # 13973)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 2/28/2022
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Affordable Housing Civil Grand Jury Report Responses Title: Discussion and Direction on Draft Response to the Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report Published December 16, 2021 Pertaining to Affordable Housing and Potential Direction to Staff on Related Policies From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Development Services
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that Council review the attached Grand Jury Report (Attachment A) and accompanying res ponse letter (Attachment B) and provid e direction to staff on any needed modifications.
Executive Summary:
On December 16, 2021, a Civil Grand Jury Report was published entitled “Affordable Housing: A Tale of Two Cities ” (Attachment A). 1 The Civil Grand Jury “ examined the efforts of the Cit y of Palo Alto and the City of Mountain View to implement an AH strategy.”
A civil grand jury provides findings and non -binding recommendations. The City of Palo Alto must respond with a written letter. Councilmembers Filseth and DuBois assisted staff in drafting a letter (Attachment B). In the letter, Council will find three possible responses to findings and four possible responses to recommendations:
Findings
Agree
Partially disagree
Disagree
Recommendations Implemented
Will be implemented (and timeline)
1 https://www.scscourt.org/court_divisions/civil/cgj/2021/Affordable%20Housing%20Final%20Report.pdf Packet Pg. 178
City of Palo Alto Page 2
Requires further study (timeline not to exceed 6 months) Will not be implemented because it is unnecessary or unwarranted
Council is asked to review the Civil Grand Jury Report , review the letter, and provide feedback.
The feedback will be incorporated into a revised draft of the letter that will be placed on the Council consent agenda. Once approved, the letter will be sent to the presiding Superior Court judge. This response is required to be submitted no later than March 16, 2022.
The brevity of this staff report reflects the elaborative content of the letter. The letter explains how and where the report accurately or inaccurately characterized the City of Palo Alto.
Councilmembers can review the report and the response in the letter to u nderstand how the City might reflect its position on the topics addressed in the report.
Summary of Key Issues:
Grand Jury reports and their recommendations are non -binding. The City is not obligated to implement the recommendations. The City may, howev er, choose to implement the recommendations.
For the most part, the ad hoc committee and staff found the recommendations missed the mark because the analysis of the issues incorrectly attributed responsibility for the production of affordable housing dur ing a limited time period to councilmembers, staff, and city actions.
The errors in the analysis lead to findings and recommendations that are challenging to implement and may not yield the desired result —even if implemented. The letter details these shortcomings in the discussion of each finding and recommendation and also capitalizes on recommendations that staff and the ad hoc believe advance the shared interest to promote affordable housing production.
Policy Implications:
While the report is nonbindin g, the City’s response is an opportunity to communicate to Palo Altans and the Bay Area community the values of the City, including a high value on producing and sustaining affordable housing.
Resource Impact:
The response to the Civil Grand Jury report represents unanticipated work that has required the use of City resources. Should Council decide to implement recommendations beyond those proposed in the draft letter, additional resources may be required. Staff will consider Council direction and follow-up as needed regarding additional required resources.
Timeline:
The City has 90 days from the Grand Jury’s publication date December 16, 2021 to respond in Packet Pg. 179
City of Palo Alto Page 3
writing.
Environmental Review:
This response does not constitute a response under the California Environmental Quality Act.
Attachments:
Attachmenta: Attachment A: Grand Jury Affordable Housing Final Report (PDF) Attachmentb: Attachment B: Palo Alto Grand Jury Response (Council Draft) (PDF) Packet Pg. 180
0 AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
AFFORDABLE HOUSING:
A Tale of Two Cities
2021 Civil Grand Jury
of Santa Clara County
Release Date: [Tentative 12/16 ]
a
Packet Pg. 181
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
Table of Contents
GLOSSARY AND ABBREVIATIONS ...................................................................................... 3 SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................... 5 BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................... 7 The Problem .............................................................................................................................. 7 Affordable Housing Defined .................................................................................................... 8 The Affordable Housing Gap ................................................................................................... 9 Consequences of the Affordable Housing Crisis .................................................................. 10 State-Driven Planning Solutions ............................................................................................ 12 Cities in the Middle ................................................................................................................. 13 METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................................... 15 DISCUSSION .............................................................................................................................. 16 Political Commitment and Community Support ................................................................. 16 Proactive Planning and Effective Reporting ........................................................................ 25 Supportive Practices ............................................................................................................... 31 AH Financing: City Funding and Financial Participation ................................................. 34 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................. 41 Finding 1 .................................................................................................................................. 41 Finding 2 .................................................................................................................................. 41 Finding 3 .................................................................................................................................. 41 Finding 4 .................................................................................................................................. 41 Finding 5 .................................................................................................................................. 42 Finding 6 .................................................................................................................................. 42 Finding 7 .................................................................................................................................. 42 Finding 8 .................................................................................................................................. 43 Finding 9 .................................................................................................................................. 43 Finding 10 ................................................................................................................................ 44 Finding 11 ................................................................................................................................ 44 Finding 12 ................................................................................................................................ 45 a
Packet Pg. 182
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
Finding 13 ................................................................................................................................ 45 Finding 14 ................................................................................................................................ 45 REQUIRED RESPONSES ......................................................................................................... 47 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 48
a
Packet Pg. 183
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
GLOSSARY AND ABBREVIATIONS
ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments: a regional
planning agency
AH Affordable Housing
AMI Area Median Income: The median family income in a
metropolitan or nonmetropolitan area
ELI
Extremely Low-Income: Households with income at or
below the Poverty Guideline or 30% of AMI, whichever
is higher
FAR
Floor Area Ratio: the measurement of a building’s floor area in relation to the size of the lot/parcel that the building is located on.
GDP
Gross Domestic Product: the total value of goods
produced, and services provided in a country for one year HCD
The California Department of Housing and Community
Development: the state agency which produces the RHNA
allocations
HE
Housing Element: a report created by each city in
response to the city’s share of RHNA housing goals
LI Low-Income: households with incomes between 50% and
80% of AMI
MI Moderate-Income: households with income between 80%
and 120% of AMI
NOFA Notice of Funding Availability: a public notice issued by a governmental entity which announces the availability of funding for a specific purpose and can be requested
through an application process. It is typically awarded competitively for proposals that achieve an outcome
desired by that organization
a
Packet Pg. 184
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
NVCAP North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan: an area in Palo Alto, located near the old Fry’s store, where multiple
proposals from City staff, residents, and property owners have been developed
Permitted An official approval that has been issued by a local government agency that allows a builder to proceed with a project.
Prop 13 Proposition 13: a June 1978 amendment to the California Constitution that established the concepts of a base year value for property tax assessments, and limitations on the tax rate and assessment increase for real property. This reduced property tax revenue for California
municipalities.
RHNA
Regional Housing Needs Allocation: On an eight-year
cycle, the state’s Department of Housing and Community
Development gives each regional planning agency a
housing planning target for the number of units needed
and affordable at various income levels. The regional
planning agencies then sub-allocate target numbers to
local jurisdictions.
VLI
Very Low-Income: households with income below 50%
of the AMI. This also includes the extremely low-income category.
a
Packet Pg. 185
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
SUMMARY
While Charles Dickens ’ novel, A Tale of Two Cities , was written over 160 years ago, we can extrapolate some important ideas that continue to be relevant today.1 At its core, the Dickens novel is about the continuing possibility of resurrection and transformation a s well as the capacity of humans to change. He believes that discarding the old way of thinking prepares the pathway for transformation. The 2021 Civil Grand Jury of Santa Clara County (Civil Grand Jury) will try to illuminate one city’s new way of thinking about A ffordable Housing (AH), while contrasting it with a city still thinking in the old way.
The Civil Grand Jury examined the efforts of the City of Palo Alto and the City of Mountain View to implement an AH strategy. While all jurisdictions in Santa Clara County (the County) struggled to meet AH mandates, Mountain View was on a path of meeting its targets (56% of AH goals as of 2019) while Palo Alto was consistently falling short (just over 10% of AH goals as of 2019).2 Why are these northern neighbors performing so differently? What practices have caused one to be more effective than the other in handling this difficult challenge? To answer the question about practices, the Civil Grand Jury identified four broad areas which significantly impact AH success. They are: (i) Political and Community Support , (ii) Proactive Planning and Effective Reporting , (iii) Supportive Practices , and (iv) Affordable Housing Financing. Each area will be discussed in more detail later in the report.
The Civil Grand Jury identified important differences between the two cities in these four areas.
Mountain View has built up strong community support for AH and has fostered and maintained the political will over several years to advance on its goals and meet its mandates. Palo Alto lacks a cohesive and effective way to communicate with its citizens and as a result, has continually struggled to garner community support for the value of and need for AH.
Mountain View has systematically planned to achieve AH targets through well -coordinated regional housing plans and straightforward near-term planning. Once the plans were in place, they were continually monitored and effectively communicated to the citizen s. D ue to the lack of alignment on AH goals and on the zoning changes AH requires, Palo Alto has a variety of separate plans and policies but few outcomes . Mountain View’s coordinated plans enabled much shorter approval cycles compared to Palo Alto.
Given the cost and complexity of AH financing, Mountain View has taken a very targeted approach to building an AH fund and leverag ing all available State and Cou nty resources. Palo Alto has
1 Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities, (New York: Penguin Books, 2000).
2 City of Mountain View, 2020 Housing Element Progress Report (2015- 2023 Housing Element), March 3, 2021, p. 3.
a
Packet Pg. 186
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
struggled to build an AH fund because, in comparison to Mountain View , there has been less commercial or mixed-use development due to its lack of political and community support and slow approval process. Both cities would also benefit from having a dedicated and empowered affordable housing manager to champion this important cause.
The Civil Grand Jury believes there are lessons to be learned from this t ale of t wo cities. Other jurisdictions might look to the se best practices to improve their own policies and strategies. Due to increasing AH needs and challenging new state mandates exerting greater state control over AH developments, there is more urgency for cities to successfully meet AH targets.
The Civil Grand Jury hopes the findings and suggestions in this report will lead to renewed efforts by the cities to successfully meet their AH targets and mandates. While the Civil Grand Jury cannot say this is the best of times yet for AH in these cities, it is through greater commitment and renewed efforts that additional housing opportunities for the residents of Santa Clara County will be created.
a
Packet Pg. 187
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
BACKGROUND
The Problem
California and the Bay Area are failing to solve one of the most important economic, environmental, and social issues facing the state —affordable housing. California’s housing/job imbalance has been growing. A McKinsey report discovered that since the 1970s, “the state [has] added only 325 homes for every 1,000 additional people.”3
Given the importance of this crisis, it is not surprising that prior civil grand juries (two in Southern California and one in Santa Clara County ) have investigated this issue. 4 In June 2018, the 2017-
2018 Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury concluded “The critical need for affordable housing is the issue of the day in Santa Clara County … and our cities are failing.” 5 However, the problem persists.
The pandemic and the economic slowdown of the pa st two years ha ve worsened the housing situation in the Bay Area for low-income wage earners and their families. This year in Santa Clara County, there are just 29 homes available for every 100 extremely low -income (ELI) renter households. Homelessness increased 31% between 2017 and 2019. 6 The County has the fourth
highest rate of homelessness of any community in the country.7
3 Jonathan Woetzel, et al., A Tool Kit to Close California’s Housing Gap, October 2016, p. 2, accessed November 26, 2021,
https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/public%20and%20social%20sector/our%20insights/closin g%20californias%20housing%20gap/closing-californias-housing-gap-full-report.pdf.
4 2016-2017 Civil Grand Jury of Los Angeles County, “Affordable Housing,” Final Report, pp. 1-18, accessed November 12, 2021, http://grandjury.co.la.ca.us/pdf/LOSANGELESCOUNTY2016- 2017CIVILGRANDJURYFINALREPORT.pdf;
2019-2020 Civil Grand Jury of Santa Barbara County, “Homelessness in Santa Barbara County: Our Everyday Epidemic,” accessed November 12, 2021, http://www.sbcgj.org/2020/homeless.pdf, and “Affordable Housing in Santa Barbara: An Oxymoron?” accessed November 12, 2021, http://www.sbcgj.org/2020/AffordableHousing.pdf.
5 2017-2018 Civil Grand Jury of Santa Clara County, “Affordable Housing Crisis: Density is our Destiny,” p. 2, June 21, 2018, https://www.scscourt.org/court_divisions/civil/cgj/2018/BMRH%20Rpt%202018-06- 19%20REVISED%20FINAL.pdf.
6Andrew Aurand, et al., The GAP: A Shortage of Affordable Homes: Appendix B: Metropolitan Comparisons, March 2021, p. 25, accessed November 13, 2021, https://reports.nlihc.org/sites/default/files/gap/Gap- Report_2021.pdf.
7 Destination Home, Understanding Homelessness in Santa Clara County, accessed September 28, 2021, https://destinationhomesv.org/understanding-homelessness/numbers/.
a
Packet Pg. 188
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
If “adequate housing is universally viewed as one of the most basic human needs ,” then Santa Clara County is not meeting a basic need of almost 50% of its residents.8
Affordable Housing Defined
The term AH denotes either rental or owned housing which costs less than a region’s average housing cost. AH is generally divided into three categories : Extremely Low-Income (ELI), Very Low-Income (VLI), or Low-Income (LI).9 These low-income levels vary by region because they are determined by an area’s Average Median Income (AMI). Table 1 shows these categories for Santa Clara County.
Income
Level
Household
1*
Household
2 Household
3 Household
4 Household
5 Low Income:
<80% of
AMI
$82,450 $94,200 $106,000 $117,750 $127,200
Very Low
Income:
<50% of
AMI
$58,000 $66,300 $74,600 $82,850 $89,500
Extremely
Low Income:
<30% of
AMI
$34,800 $39,800 $44,750 $49,700 $53,700
*Number of individuals in the Household
Table 1. Santa Clara County 2021 Area Median Income (AMI) Chart10
8 Joint Venture Silicon Valley, Institute for Regional Studies, 2021 Index Highlights, 2021, p. 41, https://jointventure.org/publications/silicon-valley-index
9 Many cities are also very concerned about housing affordability for “moderate-income” earners. See The Committee to House the Bay Area, CASA Compact, January 2019, p. 15, https://mtc.ca.gov/sites/default/files/CASA_Compact.pdf.
10 County of Santa Clara, accessed May 1, 2021,
https://covid19.sccgov.org/sites/g/files/exjcpb766/files/Documents/santa-clara-county-2021-area-median-income- ami-chart.pdf.
a
Packet Pg. 189
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
The Affordable Housing Gap
Thirty-two percent of Silicon Valley households earn $200,000 or more annually.11 This is a larger share of high- income households than the City and County of San Francisco ( 31%), California (14%), or the United States ( 9%).12 Income inequality in Silicon Valley is more than double that of the U.S. overall and has increased by 81% since 1990.13 The extreme income disparity between the highest- and lowest-wage earners drives up housing costs because increased demand by high- income households creates competition which drives home prices higher.14 Currently, California’s real estate prices are rising “three times faster than household incomes , [and] more than 50% of the state’s households cannot afford the cost of housing.”15
Nearly half of Bay Area renters are rent-burdened—they spend more than 30% of their household income on rent.16 In 2021, Santa Clara County renters need to earn 2.8 times the minimum wage, or $46.21 per hour, to afford the County’s average rent.17
11 Joint Venture Silicon Valley, 2021 Silicon Valley Index, p. 41, https://jointventure.org/publications/silicon-valley-index.
12 Ibid, p. 41.
13 Ibid, p. 40.
14 “The less equal the distribution, the higher income inequality is.” from Carol M. Kopp, “Income Inequality,” Investopedia November 2, 2021, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/income-inequality.asp; Thomas Goda, et al., Absolute Income Inequality and Rising House Prices, December 1, 2016, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2886481; Andrew Aurand, Dan Emmanuel, Daniel Threet, Ikra Rafi, and Diane Yentel, The GAP: A Shortage of Affordable Homes: Appendix B: Metropolitan, March 2021, p. 5; https://reports.nlihc.org/sites/default/files/gap/Gap-Report_2021.pdf; Joint Venture Silicon Valley, p. 40.
15 Woetzel, et al., A Tool Kit, p. vi.
16 Wikipedia, “San Francisco Bay Area,” “is defined by the Association of Bay Area Governments to include the nine counties … Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, Sonoma, and San Francisco,” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Bay_Area; Bay Area Equity Atlas, “Housing Burden:
Nine-County Bay Area vs. California,” accessed November 27, 2021, https://bayareaequityatlas.org/indicators/housing-burden#/; Joint Venture Silicon Valley, p. 102.
17 California Housing Partnership, Santa Clara County 2021 Affordable Housing Needs Report , p.1, accessed November 13, 2021, https://1p08d91kd0c03rlxhmhtydpr-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp- content/uploads/2021/05/Santa-Clara_Housing_Report.pdf.
a
Packet Pg. 190
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
Occupation
Mean
Annual
Wage
% of Monthly Income
Needed to Afford
Average Market Rent
for a 2-Bedroom Unit
Dishwashers $30,160 127%
Hairdressers $33,384 115%
Receptionists and
Information Clerks
$39,239 98%
Retail Salespersons $39,987 96%
Security Guards $41,512 93%
Preschool Teachers $41,563 92%
Medical Assistants $47,846 80%
Daycare & Preschool
Administrators
$55,020
70%
Police Officers $130,911 29%
Table 2. Santa Clara County Wage/Housing Gap18
Since the 1970s, jobs in the region have increased faster than available housing units. 19 A study by the Bay Area Council Economic Institute shows that one high-tech sector job is associated with the creation of 4.3 additional jobs in the local goods and services economy. 20 The number of AH units needed has severely lagged job creation for the past five decades.
Consequences of the Affordable Housing Crisis
According to the McKinsey Global Institute study, nearly 100% of California’s ELI, VLI, and LI households cannot afford the cost of local housing. This disparity negatively affects every aspect of a community’s well -being, forcing low er-income workers to commute long distances , increasing their stress, reducing family time, and impacting the environment. Lack of decent affordable housing increases crowded, multi -family households, housing instability, and
18 City of Gilroy, What is Affordable Housing in Santa Clara County? p. 2, accessed November 13, 2021, https://www.cityofgilroy.org/DocumentCenter/View/11636/Affordable-Housing-101-and-FAQs.
19 City of Gilroy, What is Affordable Housing in Santa Clara County? p. 2.
20 Bay Area Council Economic Institute, Technology Works: High-Tech Employment and Wages in the United States, December 2012, p. 5, accessed November 13, 2021, http://www.bayareaeconomy.org/files/pdf/TechReport.pdf.
a
Packet Pg. 191
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
homelessness.21 Diversity is diminished because “Black people, Native Americans and Latinos are more likely to experience homelessness and overcrowded housing than white people.”22
The McKinsey Global Institute calculates that “in dollar terms, California loses $140 billion per year in output or 6 percent of state G ross Domestic Product due to the housing shortage.”23 They divide these annual losses into approximately $90 billion in missed construction investment and more than a $50 billion loss in consumer spending on food, health, and education. 24 The AH crisis also impacts the social fabri c of the community. Homelessness was increasing in the County before the pandemic and the current economic uncertainty has made it worse. 25 Many
low-income wage earners are one paycheck away from eviction. Although moving to lower -cost housing areas avoids the threat of homelessness, it creates other negative consequences. About 120,000 Silicon Valley workers live long distances from their jobs. 26 S ilicon Valley “super
commuters” drive 3 hours one way to work, resulting in traffic gridlock, air pollution, and degraded health and quality of life.
27 Other negative consequences are more subtle. Low -income workers and families with long commutes are disp roportionately from non -White, non-Asian backgrounds. 28 The communities
they work in—but cannot live in—suffer a loss of diversity. Because of this loss of workers, the civic, political, cultural, and human engagement of the region narrows. In addition, the region loses
21 Andrew Aurand, “The GAP,” p.1.
22 Ibid.
23 Woetzel, et al., A Tool Kit: In Brief, p. vi.
24 Ibid.
25 Marisa Kendall, “How Can We Solve the Bay Area Housing Crisis? Build 160,000 Affordable Homes,” Mercury News, March 18, 2021, https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/03/18/how-can-we-solve-the-bay-area- housing-crisis-build-160000-affordable-homes/.
26 Sophia Harrison, Ethics Study: Silicon Valley Housing Crisis, March 19, 2021, https://sevenpillarsinstitute.org/ethics-study-silicon-valley-housing-crisis/.
27 Annette Schaefer, “Commuting Takes Its Toll,” Scientific American Mind, v. 16 no. 3, pp. 14-15, October 1, 2005, accessed December 2, 2021, https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/commuting-takes-its-toll/; Deanna Pai, “5 Ways Your Commute Affects Your Health,” Keck Medicine of USC, accessed June 7, 2021, https://www.keckmedicine.org/commuting-and-your-health/.
28 Sophia Harrison, Ethics Study. Bay Area Equity Atlas, “Extreme Community: Drivers of Inequity,” accessed November 27, 2021, https://bayareaequityatlas.org/indicators/extreme- commuting#/?geo=05000000000000017.
a
Packet Pg. 192
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
needed workers. In 2019- 2020, more people left the state than moved here, resulting in a net migration loss of 135,600.29
State-Driven Planning Solutions
The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) drives statewide housing planning efforts through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). Every eight years, the HCD works with regional councils of government to estimate the number and type of jobs that are expected . With this job estimate, RHNA t hen projects the number of housing units needed at a variety of affordability levels. HCD allocates the appropriate number of new housing units to each region. The County is part of the As sociation of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) region which is responsible for allocating the housing need among the cities and counties in the Bay Area.
30 Once ABAG has sub-allocated housing quotas, each city must produce a planning document, titled the Housing Element Report.
31 This plan identifies potential sites where housing may be built over the next eight years and the policies and strategies that are needed to help cities meet the housing goals. The sites identified typically include property the city does not own or control.
Although most cities in the County are meeting their ABAG quotas for higher -income level housing, few are meeting their AH allocations (see Table 3 ).
In response to the AH crisis, the California Governor signed on September 16, 2021, three bills that address the state’s housing crisis. Senate Bill 8 accelerates housing project approval processes and limits fee increases and a city’s ability to downzone (i.e., reduce the density of housing development in an area) . Senate Bill 9 requires cities and counties to approve development proposals that meet specified size and design standards. It also allows property owners to split a single-family lot into two lots and place up to two units on each newly created lot. Assembly Bill 1174 amends an existing measure that streamlines approval process es for housing in cities and
29 Eric Escalante, “California’s Growth Rate at Record Low as More People Leave,” ABC10 News, December 16, 2020, https://www.abc10.com/article/news/local/california/californias-growth-rate-at-record-low-as- more-people-leave/103-3f814e19-ffe1-44af-90c0-a49168be4a60.
30 California Department of Housing and Community Development, Regional Housing Needs Allocation:
5th Cycle, accessed July 17, 2021, https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/rhna/index.shtml.
31 California Department of Housing and Community Development, Housing Elements, accessed November 7, 2021, https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housing-element/index.shtml. a
Packet Pg. 193
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
counties that have not yet made sufficient progress in meeting their RHNA goals. 32 The impact of these statewide reforms is yet to be felt.33
Jurisdiction
Affordability Level
RHNA
Goals
Permits
approved as of
2019
% Progress
Palo Alto
Very Low Income (VLI)
& Low Income (LI)
1123 80 7%
Moderate Income (MI)
and Above Moderate
Income (AMI)
865 426 49%
Mountain
View
LI & VLI
1306 326 25%
MI & AMI
1620 2557 158%
San José LI & VLI
14661 854 6%
MI & AMI
20419 11748 58%
City of Santa
Clara
LI & VLI
1745 145 8%
MI & AMI
2348 3980 170%
Table 3. Percent Achievement Compared to RHNA Goals34
Cities in the Middle
Creating affordable housing is a complex local interaction among a variety of players – city officials and staff, non-profit and for-profit developers, landowners, residents, banks, and a variety of advocacy organizations. Cities by themselves rarely have the full resources needed to build AH.
32 Whitney Hodges and Talya Gulezyan, ”California Enacts New Legislation to Combat Growing Housing Crisis, But Not Without Controversy,” National Law Review, September 20, 2021, https://www.natlawreview.com/article/california-enacts-new-legislation-to-combat-growing-housing-crisis-not- without.
33 George Skelton, “Don’t Be Fooled, California’s New Housing Laws Are Game-Changers,” Mercury News, September 24, 2021, https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/09/24/skelton-dont-be-fooled-californias-new- housing-laws-are-significant/?utm_source=ourcommunitynow&utm_medium=web.
34 Association of Bay Area Governments, “2015-2019 Bay Area Building Permit Activity Report,” February 2021, https://abag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2021-02/2015-2019_Permit_Activity_Report.pdf.
a
Packet Pg. 194
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
They often lack sufficient financial resources to completely fund an AH project. They also may not have appropriate public land on which to build their RHNA quota of AH units.
Despite many challenges, some cities in the County have come closer to meeting their affordable housing RHNA quotas than other cities. The Civil Grand Jury investigate d this discrepancy by examining the efforts of two cities in the Count y that share a border , Mountain View and Palo Alto, which have very different achievement levels, as shown in Table 4.
Income
Group
% of
County
AMI
Palo
Alto
RHNA
Permits
approved
% of RHNA
Accomplished
Palo Alto
Mountain
View
RHNA
Permits
approved
% of RHNA
Accomplished
Mountain View
Very Low
0-50% 691 101 15% 814 218 27%
Low
51-81% 432 65 15% 492 212 43%
Moderate
81-
120%
278 26 9% 527 18 3%
Above
Moderate
120%+ 587 540 92% 1093 3771 345%35
Total
----
1988 732 37% 2926 4219 52%
Table 4. Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) 2015-2023:
Palo Alto & Mountain View Progress36
The table above shows the current achievement of each city. The future outlook for these two cities is also very different. By 2023, Mountain View ( MV) Planning Division anticipates reaching
45.6% of its RHNA goal for VLI housing and 75.6% of its RHNA goal for LI housing. 37 In contrast, the Palo Alto (PA) Planning Department warned the City Council in January 2021 that progress building AH continues to be slow and that “near-term housing production is not anticipated to reach” the 2023 RHNA goals.38
35 In Mountain View, the number of permitted units exceeding the RHNA Above Moderate category allocation (an “excess” of 2,678) are not counted in the calculation of the total percentage accomplished.
36 Data drawn from Mountain View and Palo Alto 2021 Housing Element reports covering progress through 2020. City of Mountain View, Community Development, 2020 Housing Element Annual Progress Report , March 23, 2021; City of Palo Alto, City Council Staff Report ID#11838, 2020 Comprehensive Plan and Housing Element Annual Progress Reports, March 15, 2021, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas- minutes-reports/reports/city-manager-reports-cmrs/2021/id-11838.pdf.
37 City of Mountain View, 2020 Housing Element Annual Progress Report, March 23, 2021, p.4.
38 City of Palo Alto, City Council Staff Report ID#10950, Housing Work Plan Update , January 21, 2020, pp. 2, 17, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/reports/city-manager-reports- cmrs/year-archive/2020/id-10950.pdf.
a
Packet Pg. 195
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
METHODOLOGY
The Civil Grand Jury’s interest in this issue started with a review of the 2017-18 Civil Grand Jury of Santa Clara County ’s report, Affordable Housing Crisis: Density is our Destiny .39 The Civil Grand Jury also reviewed other county civil grand jury reports: the 2016-2017 Civil Grand Jury of Los Angeles County’s report on affordable housing needs and progress , as well as the two Civil Grand Jury of Santa Barbara County reports, one on county homelessness and one on the C ity of Santa Barbara’s lack of affordable housing.40
The Civil Grand Jury interviewed twenty people for this report, some of them more than once.
Interviewees also answered follow -up emails, suggested additional individuals to interview, and supplied the Civil Grand Jury with documents and data. People interviewed represented a broad spectrum of interests and organizations involved i n AH: city and county elected and appointed officials, city and county staff, leaders of regional and local non- profit organizations, non- profit and for-profit developers, and representatives of residential/neighborhood advocacy organizations.
The Civil Grand Jury read the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) for Mountain View and Palo Alto for the current RHNA cycle, 2015- 2023 as well as the two Ci ties’ corresponding Housing Element planning documents and annual Housing Element updates to their respective city councils. The Civil Grand Jury also researched over a hundred ci ty-produced staff reports, land- use documents, plans and proposals, consultants’ findings, city council agendas, minutes, and memoranda. Local and regional news outlets were particularly helpful in identifying key city council actions and studies.
To better understand the actions and outcomes of these two Cities’ affordable housing efforts, the Civil Grand Jury also examined online resources and housing studies identifying best practices in AH development. A bibliography of key best practices appears in a separate section of this report’s References.
39 2017-2018 Civil Grand Jury of Santa Clara County, “Affordable Housing Crisis,” https://www.scscourt.org/court_divisions/civil/cgj/2018/BMRH%20Rpt%202018-06- 19%20REVISED%20FINAL.pdf.
40 2016-2017 Civil Grand Jury of Los Angeles County, “Affordable Housing,” Final Report, pp. 1-18, http://grandjury.co.la.ca.us/pdf/LOSANGELESCOUNTY2016-2017CIVILGRANDJURYFINALREPORT.pdf; 2019-2020 Civil Grand Jury of Santa Barbara County, “Homelessness in Santa Barbara County: Our Everyday Epidemic,” accessed November 12, 2021, http://www.sbcgj.org/2020/homeless.pdf, and “Affordable Housing in Santa Barbara: An Oxymoron?” accessed November 12, 2021, http://www.sbcgj.org/2020/AffordableHousing.pdf. a
Packet Pg. 196
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
DISCUSSION
Santa Clara County cities struggle to create AH. Yet Mountain View and Palo Alto have made radically different progress in building LI and VLI units during the first six years of the current RHNA cycle as shown in Table 4 above.
There is no easy solution that will solve the AH crisis. However, advocacy groups, researchers, and innovative municipalities have identified a set of best practices.
These best practices fall into four areas:
• Political Commitment and Community Support
• Proactive Planning and Effective Reporting
• Supportive Practices
• Affordable Housing Financing
In each area, there are tools and strategies that can be used to assist cities in building affordable housing. The Civil Grand Jury investigated how Mountain View and Palo Alto use these tools.
Political Commitment and Community Support
The housing crisis can only be solved at the local level. 41 The solution requires city leadershi p, residents, property owners, and developers collaborating to achieve AH goals. In their study of housing affordability best practices, James Wood and colleagues acknowledge that:
as city councils and planners respond to their constituents, zoning ordinances come to embody, in part, resident concerns, interests, and preferences. And a facet of land use regulation familiar to every developer is the opportunity for neighbors to express their views, in front of the city council and planning commission, on proposed new residential and commercial developments.
42 How do city leaders create the conditions that support AH? How do they align all stakeholders behind a local strategy and then successfully execute that strategy? AH success requires long-term
41 Woetzel, et al., A Tool Kit: In Brief, p. vi.
42 James Wood, Dejan Esikic, D.J. Benway, and Kathryn Macdonald-Poelman, Housing Affordability:
What Are Best Practices and Why Are They Important? (University of Utah: Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute, November 2020), p. 1, https://gardner.utah.edu/wp-content/uploads/Best-Practices-Dec2020.pdf.
a
Packet Pg. 197
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
commitment of city leaders and city residents. Commitment requires leadership, education, and persistence.
Mountain View: political commitment
Cities develop each Housing Element eight -year plan through a formal process that includes substantial community input. Both the MV City government and the residents of MV support the goal of socioeconomic and cultural diversity and support building AH as a way to reach that goal.
The Mountain View 2015 - 2023 Housing Element’s two top goals are:
• Support the production of new housing units serving a broad range of household types and incomes
• Provide assistance to households at different income levels to address their housing needs43
These goals build on several of the City’s core values, including:
• Promote a community for all with a focus on strategies to protect vulnerable populations • Improve the quantity, diversity and affordability of housing • Preserve Mountain View’s socioeconomic and cultural diversity 44 The MV City Council uses these values to drive the City’s priorities. Every two-to-five years the City Council develops a Strategic Action Plan. These plans establish an achievable set of priorities, direct funding, and identify project completion dates. They remain relatively stable across C ity Council election turnover and reflect MV’s stated values. In the past five years, the Strategic Action Plan goals have prioritized affordable housing. 45 The Civil Grand Jury learned that MV city leaders take pride in MV’s positive and stable support of AH. This support, reflected in their strategic plans, is a key component of Mountain View’s AH successes. For example, in the City’s
43 City of Mountain View, 2015-2023 Housing Element, October 14, 2014, pp. 18, 26, https://www.mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=15284 .
44 City of Mountain View, City Council Major Goals for Fiscal Years 2019-20 and 2020-2021, accessed August 23, 2021, https://www.mountainview.gov/council/goals.asp; City of Mountain View, Strategic Roadmap Action Plan for Fiscal Years 2021-22 and 2022-23, April 23, 2021, https://www.mountainview.gov/council/strategic_planning_and_visioning.asp .
45 City of Mountain View, Previous City Council Major Goals Fiscal Years 2017- 19 and 2018-19, accessed November 12, 2021, https://www.mountainview.gov/council/goals.asp#previousgoals ; City of Mountain View, FY 2019-20 through FY 2020-21 City Council Major Goals Work Plan, April 25, 2019, https://www.mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=29232 .
a
Packet Pg. 198
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
2021-2022 and 2022-2023 action plans, two of the seven strategic priorities are “Community for All” and “Intentional Development & Housing Options.”46 (Finding 1)
Mountain View: community support
The Mountain View City government could not champion AH without the support of its residents.
Many MV residents are renters, who have been politically active, and have aligned in the past with AH advocates.47 For example, in 2016 MV voters passed the Community Stabilization and Fair Rent Act (CSFRA) which tied annual rent increases to the Bay Area Consumer Price Index.48 This charter amendment was in direct response to AH scarcity and large multi-year rent increases.49
However, an active population of renters is not sufficient to explain MV’s sustained AH achievements. As in other cities, AH does not have total community support. To overcome resistance and ensure community concerns are heard and resolved, the MV City Council and staff have built a strong communication process that systematically reaches MV residents in every neighborhood. The goal of this ongoing dialog is to educate residents about the need for AH, the costs and trade-offs required, and the areas that are zoned for AH development. With this proactive communication, specific projects may be modified by resident input but are rarely derailed.
The MV C ity government organizes this communication around twenty -five published Precise Plans—defined city areas where development and zoning options are identified in detail. Some of these Precise Plans include affordable housing zoning. The City uses these as both planning and communication tools “for coordinating future public and private improvements on specific properties where special conditions of size, shape, land ownership, or existing or desired development require particular attention.”
50 Each plan is reviewed every three years on a rotating schedule. As part of each plan’s review, a team comprised of a City councilmember, staff, developers, and public safety representatives meet with neighborhood residents to talk about the
46 City of Mountain View, Strategic Priorities,
https://www.mountainview.gov/council/strategic_planning_and_visioning.asp .
47 58% of Mountain View residents are renters. See: TownCharts.com, Figure 32: Number of Owners vs.
Renters in Mountain View, CA and Area, accessed August 16, 2021, https://www.towncharts.com/California/Housing/Mountain-View-city-CA-Housing-data.html.
48 Ballotpedia, “Mountain View, California, Rent Control City Charter Amendment, Measure V November 2016,” accessed November 7, 2021,
https://ballotpedia.org/Mountain_View,_California,_Rent_Control_City_Charter_Amendment,_Measure_V_(Nove mber_2016).
49 Tenants Together, July 2019, https://www.tenantstogether.org/resources/mountain-view-tenants- coalition-mvtc.
50 City of Mountain View, Precise Plans, accessed August 18, 2021, https://www.mountainview.gov/depts/comdev/planning/regulations/precise.asp . a
Packet Pg. 199
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
plan, allay fears, and understand and mitigate concerns. One of the communication goals is to make sure no one is surprised when AH is built. The Civil Grand Jury found it compelling to hear that when visitors toured a Mountain View AH project, they could not differentiate it from a middle-income project. City staff and councilmembers take pride and satisfaction in creating attractive housing for all. (Finding 2)
Palo Alto: political commitment
In PA, the City Council, staff, and the residents have also expressed support for Affordable Housing. AH is a top priority in many of the PA City Council policy and planning documents. For example, the second and third goals in the PA 2015-2023 Housing Element address and establish policies to support AH:
• H2 GOAL: Support the Construction of Housing Near Schools, Transit, Parks, Shopping, Employment, and Cultural institutions
H2.1 POLICY: Identify and implement strategies to increase housing density and diversity…. Emphasize and encourage the development of affordable and mixed-income housing to support the City’s fair share of regional housing needs and to ensure that the City’s population remains economically diverse.
• H3 GOAL: Meet Underserved Housing Needs and Provide Community Resources to Support Our Neighborhoods
H3.1 POLICY: Encourage, foster, and preserve diverse housing opportunities for very low -, low -, and moderate- income households.
51 This emphasis on policies that support AH is reflected in other City documents and City Council actions. The Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan includes Policy L-1.4 which commits the City to:
creating an inventory of below market rate housing for purchase and rental. Work with neighbors, neighborhood associations, property owners and developers to identify barriers to infill development of below market rate and more affordable market rate housing and to remove these barriers, as appropriate. Work with these same stakeholders to identify sites and facilitate opportunities fo r below market rate housing and housing that is affordable.
52 51 City of Palo Alto, 2015-2023 Housing Element City of Palo Alto, 2014, pp. 131, 136, accessed November 7, 2021, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/planning-amp-development-services/housing- element/housingelement_2015_2023/complete-public-hearing-draft-09-17-14.pdf.
52 City of Palo Alto, City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, November 13, 2017, p. 36, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Planning-Development-Services/Long-Range-Planning/2030- Comprehensive-Plan.
a
Packet Pg. 200
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
Through Council Colleagues’ Memos and a variety of other actions, PA City councilmembers continue to acknowledge and support the need to create more AH.53 Despite this public support, the actions have not matched policies. T he City has permitted far fewer AH units in this RHNA cycle, and in the previous one, than it achieved two RHNA cycles ago:54
• 166 AH units or 15% of RHNA by 2020
• 165 AH units or 13% of RHNA by 2014
• 344 AH units or 90% of RHNA by 2006
Palo Alto has a strong tradition of community consultation. A potentially contentious issue such as where to build AH can be resolved if consultation and conversation is productive. The PA City Council has charged the Planning and Development Services Department with the responsibility to “maintain an ongoing conversation with the community regarding the need for affordable housing, the financial realities of acquiring land and building affordable housing, and the reas ons that affordable housing projects need higher densities to be feasible.” 55 However, the PA City
Council should not expect staff to manage such a contentious issue. Councilmembers should be taking a leadership role in these conversations.
Several of the current C ity leaders ran on platforms that included support for AH. Campaign websites state this commitment:
53 City of Palo Alto, Ordinance No. 5460: Housing Crisis Zoning Changes, accessed September 1, 2021, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/city-clerk/ordinances/ordinances-1909-to-present/ordinances-by- number/ord-5460.pdf?t=67468.69; City of Palo Alto, Colleagues’ Memo, No. 63027, November 6, 2019, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/reports/city-manager-reports-cmrs/year- archive/2017/id-8630-colleagues-memo.pdf; City of Palo Alto, Colleagues’ Memo, No. 73361, September 23, 2019, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/reports/city-manager-reports-cmrs/year- archive/2019/id-10548-colleagues-memo.pdf.
54 Association of Bay Area Governments, San Francisco Bay Area Progress in Meeting 2007- 2014 Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA), p. 6, accessed June 15, 2021, https://abag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/rhnaprogress2007_2014_082815.pdf ; City of Palo Alto, City Council Staff Report ID#11838, 2020 Comprehensive Plan and Housing Element Annual Progress Reports , March 15, 2021, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/reports/city-manager-reports- cmrs/2021/id-11838.pdf; City of Palo Alto, 2015-2023 Housing Element City of Palo Alto, p. 127; City of Palo Alto, Housing Work Plan, February 2018 Draft, p. 10, accessed November 12, 2021, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/planning-amp-development- services/2018_01_26_housing_work_plan_final.pdf.
55 City of Palo Alto, City Council Staff Report ID#10950, Housing Work Plan 2018- 2019: Summary Status Update, January 21, 2020, pp. 5. 7, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes- reports/reports/city-manager-reports-cmrs/year-archive/2020/id-10950.pdf.
a
Packet Pg. 201
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
• funding for moderate and low-income housing56
• Prioritize housing by focusing on leveraging government programs, developer fees, and implementing our Comprehensive Plan to increase our affordable (below market rate) housing57
• a vision for Palo Alto that is inclusive and diverse … provides new affordable housing opportunities
58 Rather than relying on staff to educate PA residents about the complexities involved in building AH and hear resident concerns, PA councilmembers should be the point-persons in working with and listening to residents. (Finding 3
)
Palo Alto: community support
Palo Alto conducts an annual community survey that is reported to the City Council and helps shape their annual plan. Over the past four years, resident concern about the lack o f affordable housing has become more prominent.59 In the 2021 Community Survey, nine in ten PA residents rated the quality of their city and neighborhoods as excellent or good. The unique qualities of PA’s 35 neighborhoods are highly valued, and residents wish to preserve their tree-lined streets, many parks, and historic homes and neighborhoods. A desire to maintain these qualities motivates some residents to resist the changes AH might bring. In that same survey, the responses to the question “What should the city change?” give a flavor of the tensions surrounding the AH issue for Palo Altans:
• Build more housing! Affordable housing will give us a more diverse and vibrant city. The idea that it will ruin what we have is just silly. • Limit developers from adding more residences because it makes traffic a nightmare.
• More affordable housing for all – teachers, firemen, police, secretaries, etc.
56 Patrick Burt, “My Top 3 Priorities,” Voters’ Edge California, November 3, 2020, https://votersedge.org/ca/en/election/2020-11-03/santa-clara-county/city-council-city-of-palo-alto/patrick-burt.
57 Tom DuBois, “Re-Elect Tom DuBois for Palo Alto City Council,” accessed September 21, 2021, https://www.votedubois.com.
58 Greer Stone, “Greer Stone Palo Alto City Council,” accessed September 21, 2021, http://www.greerstone.com/GStone2020/home.asp.
59 City of Palo Alto, City Council Staff Report ID#12270, Presentation of the Annual Community Survey Results, May 17, 2021, p. 14, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes- reports/reports/city-manager-reports-cmrs/2021/id-12270.pdf.
a
Packet Pg. 202
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
• Stop increasing population density of the city by allowing more housing that is not single family. I bought into Palo Alto because it is primarily single-family zoning.60
Unfortunately, several promising AH projects have been derailed in this RHNA cycle and the last cycle because of negative input from residents.61 Resident objections to AH proposals stem from a variety of reasons, including lack of agreement on goals, failure to feel consulted, and worry that AH will compromise the beauty and safety of a neighborhood.
One example of a lack of agreement on goals is the controversial North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan (NVCAP) project near the former Fry’s location. A fourteen-person panel worked with staff from the PA Planning Department, developers, and consultants to create alternative plans for the NVCAP area. After four years, the panel has not reached a consensus on goals, let alone ways to reach those goals.
The City of Palo Alto and pro- AH groups see the North Ventura area as an opportunity to build needed AH. Many residents support AH but do not want their neighborhood to become the vanguard for tall, dense buildings and parking scarcity. Some residents also do not accept the City’s model of mixed-use development as a trade-off for AH units. The Civil Grand Jury learned that some members of the working group and residents felt the project’s goals were changed by staff and the consultants during the planning process. Residents felt the changes no longer aligned with what the neighborhood wanted.
The PA Planning Department based its work in part on financial data from a study done in 2020 that identified what percentage of AH units were financially feasible for a for-profit developer to include in the project .
62 The staff and consultants also “engaged in a tremendous amount of
60 City of Palo Alto, City Council Staff Report ID#12270, pp. 65-68, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/reports/city-manager-reports- cmrs/2021/id-12270.pdf.
61 Louis Hansen, “Fierce, 7-Year NIMBY Battle in Palo Alto Reaches a Conclusion: Big $5 Million Homes Rise on Site Once Eyed for Affordable Senior Units,” Mercury News, June 23, 2020, https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/06/23/fierce-7-year-nimby-battle-in-palo-alto-reaches-a-luxury-conclusion/; Gennady Sheyner, “Facing Concerns from College Terrace, City Looks to Reassert Commitment to Single-Family Housing Zones,” Palo Alto Weekly, April 7, 2021, https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2021/04/07/facing- concerns-from-college-terrace-city-looks-to-reassert-commitment-to-single-family-housing-zones; Gennady Sheyner, “With No Consensus in Sight, Palo Alto’s Vision for Ventura Gets Murky,” Palo Alto Weekly, June 10, 2021, https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2021/06/10/with-no-consensus-in-sight-palo-altos-vision-for-ventura- gets-murky.
a
Packet Pg. 203
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
community outreach, providing numerous opportunities for public engagement and meaningful input.”63
Few people were satisfied by t he three alternatives presented to the PA City Council. They were “deemed unfeasible by the city’s consultants and unappealing by the property owners and residents.”64 North Ventura residents felt that the City’s staff and consultants controlled the process and did not listen to community concerns. 65 The outcome of this four -year planning process has been characterized as “a terrible, disappointing, and unfortunate failure.”66
An example of another failed project occurred in 2012. T he non- profit Palo Alto Housing Corporation purchased a 2.5-acre site on Arastradero Road with plans to build 60 units of AH for seniors and 15 single -family homes. In September 2012, the non- profit held a poorly attended community meeting to introduce nearby residents to the project. 67 Another community meeting
was held in January 2013. With few residents in attendance, t he PA Planning and Transportation Commission approved a plan to change the zoning, and the PA City Council approved loaning funds to the non-profit in March of that year. A final neighborhood meeting was held in April to discuss the project’s modified plans and its impact on traffic. In contrast to the poorly attended neighborhood and C ity meetings, a large group of residents attended the May 2013 PA City Council meeting to protest the development. They expressed the feeling that their issues had not been adequately listened to by PA City Council and the non- profit developer.68 After signatures were gathered, a measure was placed on the November 2013 ballot to halt the development. Once the measure passed, Palo Alto Housing Corporation was unable to build the project.
62 City of Palo Alto, City Council Staff Report ID#11472, “Inclusionary Below Market Rate Feasibility Study,” September 21, 2020, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/reports/city- manager-reports-cmrs/year-archive/2020-2/id-11472.pdf.
63 City of Palo Alto, City Council Staff Report ID#11930, “NVCAP – Review Plan Alternatives,”, June 14, 2021, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/reports/city-manager-reports- cmrs/2021/id-11930.pdf.
64 Sheyner, “With No Consensus.”
65 Rebecca Sanders, “PAN’s Outreach to the Community Regarding the NVCAP2 Survey,” April 16, 2020, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/planning-amp-development-services/north-ventura-cap/survey- emails-only.pdf?t=42004.46.
66 Sheyner, “With No Consensus.”
67 Gennady Sheyner, “What’s Measure D Really About?” Palo Alto Online, October 11, 2013, https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2013/10/11/whats-measure-d-really-about.
68 Joseph Hirsch, “Guest Opinion: A Neighborhood Perspective of Maybell Avenue Development,” Palo Alto Weekly, July 16, 2016, https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2016/07/16/guest-opinion-a-neighborhood- perspective-of-maybell-avenue-development.
a
Packet Pg. 204
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
Resident commenting on a variety of AH proposed projects indicate that they want to be engaged in PA’s AH planning and are willing to negotiate and compromise:
• Residents need to be actively and genuinely consulted with regard to significant developments proposed to take place in their immediate neighborhood69
• The Working Group met for two years, and they [ City staff] didn’t respect their time, commitment, and dedication to ev en take their ideas under consideration”70
• Despite initial misgivings…residents of the Ventura neighborhood on Monday rallied behind the project. Many credited the development team for listening and constructively responding to their concerns.71
Building AH is neither simple nor inexpensive. Palo Altans need to understand the possible locations, design requirements, and financing required for AH . Responding to residential apprehensiveness that an AH project will lead to crime and increased traffic, the C ity can lead discussions that explain to residents how an AH project will allow teachers, c ity workers, and service employees to live in the c ity where they work. C ity leaders can also lead discussions to combat the idea that AH developers are motivated by profit when, in fact, they are often non-profit organizations.
The City can also explain the perspective of for-profit developers who expect a fair rate of return on the time and money they must invest , and the risk they take when developing a mixed -use project that combines AH with commercial space or market -rate housing. An urban economics consulting firm analyzed the feasibility of including below-market rate housing in different types of developments.72 Their analysis assumed that if a rental project provided a return of 5% or more, the project was “highly likely” to be bui lt; if the return was less than 4.75 %, the project was unlikely to be built. Many residents believe that developers make excessive profits and are unaware that many AH projects struggle to reach viability . Residents are less likely to make financially
69 Hirsch, “Guest Opinion.”
70 Suzanne Keehn, Letter to City Council, “Fw: NVCAP,” June 14, 2021, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/planning-amp-development-services/north-ventura-cap/all-public- comments_1.pdf.
71 Gennady Sheyner, “First Affordable-Housing Project in Seven Years Wins Approval: City Council Supports 59-Unit Development on El Camino Real,” Palo Alto Weekly, January 14, 2019, https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2019/01/14/affordable-housing-project-wins-approval-in-palo-alto.
72 City of Palo Alto, Inclusionary Below Market Rate Feasibility Study, p. 5.
a
Packet Pg. 205
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
untenable proposals or objections to a project if they understand the issues and tradeoffs and feel their concerns have been respected.73
According to many researchers, building resident and stakeholder support for AH is an effective best practice. 74 City staff do not have the same stature as elected leaders. Therefore, PA City councilmembers cannot expect staff alone to lead community conversations that enable PA residents to understand AH needs and cost requirements and to build community support. C ity councilmembers--PA's community leaders --can play a critical role in publicly supporting and discussing AH. Since many current PA City councilmembers ran on platforms that included AH, they are well-positioned to take a leadership role in discussing this issue with residents.
To be more successful in building AH, the PA City Council should continue its tradition of strong resident input but engage with residents to create a series of defined area plans with clear zoning rules, including for AH zoning. One example of the C ity’s success in doing this is the South of Forest Area Coordinated Area Plan (SOFACAP).75 Palo Alto should employ the process used for SOFACAP to work with residents in other areas where AH is appropriate to build. Direct, transparent, and committed dialog, particularly when crafting plans and projects, can be effective.
Palo Alto City councilmembers should develop a communication plan that they can use to engage residents and stakeholders in proactive, detailed, and fact -based conversation to allay resident concerns, focus on the benefits of AH, and build resident support.76 (Finding 4)
Proactive Planning and Effective Reporting
The RHNA- mandated Housing Element reports written by cities are planning documents as opposed to approved projects. The Housing Element lists potential sites where AH might be built as well as policies and actions cities might undertake to help build AH. T o be effective, these
73 Allison Levitsky, “Palo Alto Council Unanimously Approves Affordable Housing Project,” Daily Post, January 15, 2019, https://padailypost.com/2019/01/15/palo-alto-council-unanimously-approves-affordable-housing- project/.
74 Woetzel, et al., Toolkit, p. iv; James Wood, et al., Housing Affordability,
75 City of Palo Alto, South of Forest Area Coordinated Plan, December 2003, accessed November 13, 2021, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/planning-amp-development-services/file-migration/current- planning/forms-and-guidelines/south-of-forest-coordinated-area-plan-phase-2.pdf.
76 See “Mountain View: Political Commitment” section above; Hee-Jung Jun, “The Link Between Local Comprehensive Plans and Housing Affordability,” Journal of the American Planning Association v. 83, no. 3 (Summer 2017), pp. 249-261, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01944363.2017.1321496 ; City of Morgan Hill, 2021 Housing Conversation, accessed July 8, 2021, https://www.morgan-hill.ca.gov/2162/2021- Housing-Conversation.
a
Packet Pg. 206
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
general plans must be turned into action- oriented outcomes supported by local leadership, developers, and residents.77 To develop resident support, cities must not only create specific plans with resident input but also communicate those plans effectively to the community.
Creating community engagement by including community members in the advance planning processes and communicating the value of AH are best practices.78 Successful AH projects require “that local governments should restore direct reliance on adopted plans and create transparency, predictability, reliability and timeliness to the housing approvals process.”79
So how effective are MV and PA in creating proactive plans that are realistic for all stakeholders (residents, developers) and result in real housing being built? Are these plans well-tailored to each area or a mix of options that require time -consuming negotiations or approvals ? Who l eads the planning effort and engages stakeholders? Finally, how well are the two Cities making progress on these plans and their AH goals?
Mountain View: proactive planning
Mountain View has 25 Precise Plans covering 24 neighborhoods. The City uses these plans as “a tool for coordinating future public and private improvements on specific properties where special conditions of size, shape, land ownership, or existing or desired development require particular attention.”
80 The visions, principles, and goals in these plans are coordinated with MV’s General Plan and Housing Element Plan. But the Precise Plans live up to their titles —they are concrete, spelling out where and how AH will be included.81
Not only does MV leadership take a proactive role in creating precise plans, but when property owners struggle to resolve development conflicts, MV has actively stepped in to offer a
77 Hee-Jung Jun, “The Link Between Local Comprehensive Plans and Housing Affordability,” p. 258,, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01944363.2017.1321496 ; Charles Hoch, “How Plan Mandates Work:
Affordable Housing in Illinois,” Journal of the American Planning Association v. 73, no. 1 (Winter 2007), pp. 87, 94-95, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01944360708976138.
78 Wood, et al., Housing Affordability, p. 5.
79 Committee to House the Bay Area, CASA Compact, p. 12.
80 City of Mountain View, Precise Plans.
81 See for example: City of Mountain View, El Camino Real Precise Plan, p. 3, accessed August 21, 2021, https://www.mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=29701 ; North Bayshore Precise Plan:
North Bayshore Affordable Housing Administrative Guidelines, accessed August 21, 2021, https://www.mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=22584 ; East Whisman Precise Plan:
Guiding Principles, p. 17, accessed August 17, 2021,
https://www.mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=32005 . a
Packet Pg. 207
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
resolution.82 Within MV’s North Bayshore Precise Plan area, two property owners with adjacent land (Google and SyWest) could not agree on a coordinated approach to developing the sites. In response, the MV City Council created a new set of development standards for a 30-acre section.
This proposed Gateway Master Plan “will help implement the goals and objectives of the [broader] Precise Plan.”83 Google likes the proposed plan, but SyWest says it doesn’t work financially for them. City officials are working proactively with the developers to resolve their concerns over this proposed solution.84
In addition to the Precise Plans, the MV City Council uses its planning process to focus City work on AH outcomes. The Council periodically adopts and updates a 2- to–5-year Strategic Roadmap Action Plan in which AH is prioritized. The current plan lists specific affordable housing actions to be completed in the next two years of the five-year plan. 85 (Finding 5)
Palo Alto: multiple plans, few outcomes
Unlike MV, PA does not have a comprehensive, well -organized set of planning documents that clearly identify regions where the City is planning AH development that the Civil Grand Jury could find. Instead, AH is addressed in a confusing combination of general and specific approaches.
The Comprehensive Plan defines allowable land uses for residential, mixed-use, and commercial areas within PA. Some areas include options for affordable housing. 86 The Comprehensive Plan
was used extensively in creating PA’s 2015-2023 Housing Element.
Palo Alto strengthened its current Housing Element with specific AH-enabling zoning changes in 2019 when the PA City Council passed the Housing Work Plan Implementation Ordinance.
82 Martin Alkire, North Bayshore Gateway Master Plan: Public Draft – August 2021, accessed November 13, 2021, https://www.mv-voice.com/news/reports/1629396384.pdf.
83 City of Mountain View, Gateway Master Plan, accessed August 21, 2021, https://www.mountainview.gov/depts/comdev/planning/activeprojects/gateway_master_plan.asp .
84 Wesley Severson, “Mountain View Pushes Ambitious Development Plans, Developer Calls them Unrealistic,” Hoodline, August 25, 2021, https://hoodline.com/2021/08/mountain-view-pushes-ambitious- development-plans-developer-calls-them-unrealistic/.
85 City of Mountain View, Strategic Roadmap Action Plan.
86 City of Palo Alto, 2030 Comprehensive Plan, Land Use and Community Design Elem ent, pp. 31-33, accessed August 21, 2021, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/planning-amp-development- services/3.-comprehensive-plan/comprehensive-plan/2030-comp-plan-2-land-use-june-21.pdf.
a
Packet Pg. 208
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
Prompted by a 2018 Council Colleagues’ Memo calling for more AH, this ordinance amended the Municipal Code to “remove barriers and disincentives to housing development at higher densities where appropriate near transit, jobs and services, and that is affordable for a range of income levels [sic].”87 By approving these z oning changes, PA acknowledged that the housing shortage , particularly for AH, “threatens the city’s prosperity, diversity, stability, environment, quality of life, and community character.”88
The PA City Council has created many documents that address af fordable housing, including the Comprehensive Plan, the Housing Element , Title 18 of the Municipal Code , and numerous ordinances, zoning maps, reports, studies, and design and development guidelines:
• Housing Work Plan
• Coordinated Area Plans (CAP)
• Planned Home Zones (PHZ)
• Priority Development Areas (PDA)
• Affordable Housing Overlays
• Workforce Housing Overlays
• Housing Incentive Programs
There has been some AH success in the current RHNA cycle. For example, a 2019 Palo Alto Weekly article announced, “First Affordable-Housing Project in Seven Years Wins Approval.” 89 Yet, as the headline demonstrates, PA is not making rapid progress in meeting the community’s AH needs.
In January 2020, the PA Planning and Development Services Department updated City Council on housing progress. Staff was not optimistic about the City’s ability to meet its RHNA goals. The update warned that “many of the conditions that precipitated the [ 2018 Council] Colleagues’ Memo … continue” and that “the lack of affordable housing at all income levels contributes to” many other problems PA is experiencing, such as “ traffic congestion, increased motorist travel time, … greater greenhouse gas emissions ,” and the difficulty hiring and retain ing low- wage workers.
90 87 City of Palo Alto, Municipal Code Ordinance No. 5460, April 1, 2019, p. 2, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/71494.
88 Ibid.
89 Gennady Sheyner, “First Affordable-Housing Project in Seven Years Wins Approval: City Council Supports 59-Unit Development on El Camino Real,” Palo Alto Weekly, January 14, 2019, https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2019/01/14/affordable-housing-project-wins-approval-in-palo-alto.
a
Packet Pg. 209
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
These planning documents offer different levers to help AH projects, but there have been few results. To match AH outcomes with their policy goals and campaign platforms, PA leaders need to employ best planning practices such as creating specific planned areas with identified densities, setbacks, height limits, etc., that support AH development. The PA City Council should identify specific regions where zoning will allow AH t o be feasible and clarify and simplify zoning requirements. This should be done with wide community input and education.
Compact, comprehensive, and clear plans coupled with 1- to-2-year strategic plans with specific outcomes would give the PA City Council a powerful tool to help make AH development viable. (Finding 6)
Mountain View: effective reporting
Mountain View reports on its plans in a variety of ways. As discussed above in the Community Support section, MV City councilmembers conduct annual conversations with residents. The MV Planning Division’s website has the precise plans, often with supporting documentation and details.91 In addition, the MV Planning Division annually presents a Housing Element Annual Progress Report to the City Council (and RHNA). This report is accompanied by a cover memo that summarizes the specific actions and achievements made during the year, which makes the City’s accomplishments easy to identify and quantify.
92 The MV 2015-2023 Housing Element text is available on the City’s website. 93 However, a search
of the City’s website does not easily reveal any 2015-2023 annual updates. The most prominent search result is a link to the 2023-2031 Housing Element Update on the Community Development website.94 A version of the 2020 Housing Element Annual Update is provided as an attachment to the March 3, 2021 agenda of the MV Environmental Planning Commission as a staff report. 95
90 City of Palo Alto, City Council Staff Report ID#10950, Housing Work Plan Update , January 21, 2020, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/reports/city-manager-reports-cmrs/year- archive/2020/id-10950.pdf.
91 City of Mountain View, Precise Plans.
92 City of Mountain View, 2020 Housing Element Annual Progress Report, March 23, 2021.
93 City of Mountain View, 2015-2023 Housing Element, October 14, 2014, https://www.mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=15284 .
94 City of Mountain View, General Plan and Housing Element, accessed August 24, 2021, https://www.mountainview.gov/depts/comdev/planning/regulations/general.asp.
a
Packet Pg. 210
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
Mountain View should update its website to include all the annual Housing Element Progress Reports. (Finding 7)
Palo Alto: reporting confusion
The Civil Grand Jury found that there are so many plans —with documents, specific rules, and details—that it is difficult for PA residents to understand where AH is planned, what specific design elements zoning would permit (density, height, setbacks, etc.), and what public benefits might accompany each project. Since there is often no linked text, the myriad of plans, overlays, and other documents are also difficult to find when mentioned on a website.96
Annual reports are an excellent way to communicate AH progress. This past year, PA ’s Planning Department submitted a memo with its 2020 Comprehensive Plan and Housing Element Annual Progress Report to the City Council. 97 The Comprehensive Plan’s progress and the Housing Element’s Update are discussed together. The annual Housing Element Update tables identifying progress are difficult to understand and are buried as an accompanying attachment. Palo Alto should more clearly communicate its annual AH progress.
The City’s website can be a powerful tool to aid in communicating AH plans and achievements to the community. Palo Alto is to be commended on the fact that the full text of its 2015-2023 Housing Element is linked from the Planning & Development website and that it h as Annual Housing Element Progress Reports from 2015 th rough 2018. 98 It should update this annual list
with the missing most recent years. (Finding 8)
95 City of Mountain View, Environmental Planning Commission, “Staff Report, 2020 Housing Element Progress Report,” March 3, 2021,
https://mountainview.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4811887&GUID=31D36D2F -EA70-4326-BE48- 2026143531E0&Options=&Search=.
96 See City of Palo Alto, Area Plans and Studies: Ongoing Area Plans and Studies, “Priority Development Areas (PDAs) and Priority Conservation Areas (PCAs),” December 12, 2019. This website has two paragraphs announcing the adoption of a PDA for University Avenue/Downtown but there are no linked documents, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/News-articles/Planning-and-Development-Services/Priority-Development-Areas- PDAs-and-Priority-Conservation-Areas-PCAs.
97 City of Palo Alto, City Council Staff Report ID#11838, 2020 Comprehensive Plan and Housing Element Annual Progress Reports, March 15, 2021, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes- reports/reports/city-manager-reports-cmrs/2021/id-11838.pdf.
98 City of Palo Alto, Housing Element (2015-2023), accessed August 24, 2021, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Planning-and-Development-Services/Long-Range-Planning/Housing- Policies-and-Programs/Housing-Element-2015-2023.
a
Packet Pg. 211
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
Supportive Practices
Defining and communicating neighborhood plans is an essential best practice in the creation of AH. But, after plans are adopted, cities must create an environment that supports developers as they consider the construction of housing.
One supportive practice is “streamlining and standardizing the uncertain and time -consuming approval process.”
99 The Civil Grand Jury learned that a second supportive practice is to identify a member of the city planning staff who takes the lead on AH development, and who can guide developers through the approval process.
Efficient city review and approval
In Mountain View, the City review and approval process, beginning with the submission of an initial proposal and ending with formal approval by the City Council, averages less than twelve months. Two Mountain View projects with AH units reflect this efficient process:
• 535-555 Walker Dr., with 58 townhouse units, took eleven months. This involved two meetings with the Development Review Committee followed by the MV City Council approval.100
• 394 Ortega Ave., a 144 -unit project ( including five AH units), took ten months. This involved two meetings with the Development Review Committee, a meeting with the Environmental Planning Commission, and the MV City Council approval.
101
The length of time it takes developers in PA to move from proposal to entitlement is significantly longer. Two projects with sizes comparable to MV’s examples are:
• 2755 El Camino Ave., a 57-unit project, took two years and one month from the preliminary screening before the PA City Council to the final City
99 Wood, et al., Housing Affordability, p. 5.
100 City of Mountain View, “Council Report,” June 12, 2018, https://mountainview.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3523778&GUID=57E1911A -07B7-4D74-87F5- 0185E491F20A.
101 City of Mountain View, “Council Report,” September 20, 2016, https://mountainview.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2838231&GUID=74838AC8-BB92-49DC-8CC1- 2F0D4B52B705&Options=&Search=.
a
Packet Pg. 212
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
Council approval. The approval process involved a preliminary review by the PA City Council, reviews by the Planning Commission and the Architectural Review Board, and a final City Council hearing. This project was complicated by a requirement to amend the zoning code and because architectural plans had to be resubmitted six times.102 • 788-796 San Antonio Rd., ground-level retail with 102 units (including 16 below market rate units ), took one year and eleven months. The approval process included rezoning, an architectural review, an Environmental Impact Report, and the PA City Council approval.
103
The Civil Grand Jury found that PA’s lengthy approval process discourages devel opers from working with the City. If the PA wants to encourage the development of AH, it needs to find ways to streamline the approval process. (Finding 9)
Palo Alto uses Planned Home Zoning to offer developers greater density, higher building height, and less required parking—provided the project includes Below Market Rate (BMR) housing. This type of development requires a preliminary review by the PA City Council, which adds about four months to the time it takes to obtain final approval. This is an additional risk for developers, who not only must extend the project schedule by four months, but after investing in the project, may subsequently discover that the City Council dislikes the proposed development. Palo Alto should take the time to define specific area development plans with the attendant neighborhood involvement, similar to the Precise Plan process in Mountain View. 104 If Palo Alto develops area
plans that clearly specify the designs that would be acceptable to the City and the community, not only could preliminary reviews be eliminated, but the developer could invest in the project with more confidence that final approval would be obtained.
Another possibility is to combine public meetings. Currently, after the preliminary review by the PA City Council, the project is reviewed in a public meeting with the PA Planning and
102 City of Palo Alto, “2755 El Camino, Attachments,” accessed December 3, 2021, https://aca- prod.accela.com/paloalto/Cap/CapDetail.aspx?Module=Planning&TabName=Planning&capID1=16PLN&capID2= 00000&capID3=00234&agencyCode=PALOALTO&IsToShowInspection=no; https://aca- prod.accela.com/paloalto/Cap/CapDetail.aspx?Module=Planning&TabName=Planning&capID1=16PLN&capID2= 00000&capID3=00464&agencyCode=PALOALTO&IsToShowInspection=no.
103 City of Palo Alto, “788-796 San Antonio Road, Attachments,” accessed December 3, 2021, https://aca- prod.accela.com/paloalto/Cap/CapDetail.aspx?Module=Planning&TabName=Planning&capID1=19PLN&capID2= 00000&capID3=00084&agencyCode=PALOALTO&IsToShowInspection=no.
104 The City of Palo Alto uses the phrase “Precise Plans” in the Palo Alto Municipal Code: Title 20 Precise Plans to “provide for the systematic execution of the circulation element of the general plan … by [among other regulations] designating the precise location of planned rights-of-way” and prevent encroachments. Accessed December 10, 2010, https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/paloalto/latest/paloalto_ca/0 -0-0-82433. a
Packet Pg. 213
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
Transportation Commission, and in a separate public meeting with the Architectural Review Board. In contrast, MV combines the two meetings with its Design Review Committee, which is chaired by a planning administrator and two consulting architects. Combining the public review meetings would reduce the time it takes for a project to obtain final approval. T his would t ake away an opportunity for public comment, but this drawback could be effectively neutralized by encouraging public feedback when specific area development plans are defined. Palo Alto planners should explore whether a combined process would speed up its approval timeline.
There may be other ways to reduce the time it takes for developers to get their plans approved by the City. Palo Alto planning staff should consult with Mountain View staff to explore additional ways to streamline their approval process.
Single role to manage and advocate for affordable housing
A classic organizational best practice involves “assigning responsibility for outcomes along with the authority to do what is needed to produce the desired results.” 105 A dedicated AH manager would be responsible for outcomes and drive progress toward the city’s AH target. Cities such as Morgan Hill have created a similar affordable housing position leading to strong results. The Civil Grand Jury learned that the Morgan Hill Housing Manager is responsible for achieving the City of Morgan Hill’s AH numbers and coordinates projects, funding sources, and organizations to achieve AH outcomes. Top city leader support is critical to th e success of positio n. With that support, a knowledgeable and dedicated AH manager can be responsible for the AH targets, solve problems, and provide stakeholders with expert advice.
The Civil Grand Jury learned that both non-profit and for-profit developers prefer to work with a city expert , a single point-of- contact, particularly when negotiating about residential and affordable units. According to the Newport Beach Community Development Director , “establishing a dialogue with developers on the front end of projects is important.” 106 By
consulting with developers, a city’s AH manager can understand what they need to make a project feasible. This manager can eliminate lengthy negotiations and prevent avoidable delays. With a clear understanding of both sides’ priorities, the AH manager is in a strong negotiation position when working with for-profit developers. (Finding 10
)
105 Sam Lloyd, “Managers Must Delegate Effectively to Develop Employees: Planning Can Minimize Poor Performance,” accessed August 15, 2021, https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/organizational-and- employee-development/pages/delegateeffectively.aspx; Alexandra Kalev, Frank Dobbin, and Erin Kelly, “Best Practices or Best Guesses? Assessing the Efficacy of Corporate Affirmative Action and Diversity Practices,” American Sociological Review v. 71, no. 4 (2006), pp. 589-617.
106 Nikie Johnson, and Jeff Collins, “Report Card: California Cities, Counties Failing Again on Affordable Housing Goals,” Orange County Register, January 31, 2021, https://www.ocregister.com/2021/01/31/report-card- california-cities-counties-failing-again-on-affordable-housing-goals/. a
Packet Pg. 214
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
AH Financing: City Funding and Financial Participation
Affordable housing is expensive
In June of this year, MV announced its Montecito Proposal for 84 affordable units and 147 bedrooms.107 The planned project development cost totals $88,702,160, or $1,055,978 per unit and $591,348 per bedroom. In December 2020, MV announced its similarly scaled La Avenida project.108 The total development cost was listed as $78,573,646 for 100 units ($785,736 per unit) and 119 bedrooms ($603,416 per bedroom). In Santa Clara County, 29 projects - totaling 2,969 units and 3,989 bedrooms - have received Measure A funding approval over a three-year span. The average cost per unit of AH for those projects is $678,365. The average cost per bedroom for these same projects is $504,905.
Affordable housing financing is complex
One public official close to this issue noted that the projects require anywhere from 8 -15 sources of financing. As an example of this complexity, the funding plan for the Montecito project is shown in Table 5 below. In addition to the Measure A and MV funds, the project required seven additional sources:
Permanent Sources Dollar Amounts
Tax Credit Equity $31,085,934
City of Mountain View 18,000,000
County of Santa Clara Measure A 16,000,000
Federal Home Loan Bank-Affordable Housing Program 820,000 Conventional Loan 9,507,000
Contributed Developer Fee 5,478,000
Deferred Developer Fee 877,655
Fee Waivers
Deferred Interest from City and County
TOTAL
5,473,911
1,459,660
$88,702,160
Table 5. Charities Housing Funding Proposal – 1265 Montecito Avenue
107 Kevin Forestieri, “Mountain View City Council Earmarks $16M for Costly New 84-Unit Affordable Housing Project,” Mountain View Voice, June 28, 2021, https://www.mv-voice.com/news/2021/06/28/mountain- view-city-council-earmarks-16m-for-costly-new-84-unit-affordable-housing-project.
108 Kevin Forestieri, “Mountain View Pours $15M into North Bayshore’s First Affordable Housing Project, Mountain View Voice, December 14, 2020, https://dmv-voice.com/news/2020/12/14/mountain-view-pours-15m- into-north-bayshores-first-affordable-housing-project.
a
Packet Pg. 215
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
The largest source, the Tax Credit Equity, is from a Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program.109
When the Charities Housing Funding Proposal to build AH at 1265 Montecito Avenue in MV was later announced, the funding mix changed. Santa Clara County took the lead on the project, committing $18M, and MV committed $16M.
Multi-faceted funding strategies build more affordable housing
Despite the scale of resources required and the complexity of project financing, AH does get built.
However, it is difficult to fully understand the financing and what deals are made because real estate negotiations are done behind closed doors. Real estate negotiations, like those that involve personnel decisions, are not subject to the Ralph M. Brown Act’s public meeting requirements. 110
In addition, residential and commercial development projects add costs to local infrastructure and services. When offices and housing are built , more people will live in the community. More classrooms and teachers will be needed. Parks need to be built. D emands for police, fire and utilities providers will increase. The need for other service workers in restaurants and delivery services will increase and those individuals will need places to live. In a post-Prop 13 world, cities must find ways to fund these services. Often that means charging fees on commercial development projects.
Multiple public funding sources are available t o achieve AH goals. Federal and state programs play a central role. A prime example is the federal tax credit program in the Montecito project.
Both the federal government and the State are committing funding through Homekey (as described below). The federal government is the primary funding source for AH, supplying all the Low - Income Housing Tax Credit money and most of the funding for Homekey. Unfortunately, the State of California is not providing a substantial amount of funding to help cities with this dif ficult problem.
109 The Low-Income Housing Tax Credit is a federal resource, administered by the states, available to support affordable housing. Developers receiving an award use the tax credits to raise equity capital from investors. The tax credit gives investors a dollar-for-dollar reduction in their federal tax liability in exchange for equity. The tax credits are claimed over a ten-year period.
110 California Government Code § 54956.8, accessed November 7, 2021, https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&division=2.&title=5.&part=1.&ch apter=9.&article=.
a
Packet Pg. 216
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
Santa Clara County plays an important fiscal role as well. Measure A, a bond approved by voters in 2016, provides $950M to build AH.111 Santa Clara County is commended for its support of the County’s AH needs.
Private organizations such as the Housing Trust Silicon Valley also play a role. Their Tech Fund enables private individuals and Bay Area employers to invest in AH projects.112
City Affordable Housing funding challenges and opportunities
The task at the city level is twofold. First, it must leverage all possible external funding from federal, state, and county sources. The Montecito and La Avenida projects are good examples of leveraging from city and county funds, including funds from Measure A.
Second, cities must contribute directly. An excellent recent example of this occurred when MV contributed $15M to the La Avenida Project and $16M to the Montecito Project. It is critical for cities to contribute funding since city funds are often the first—and most necessary —step to acquiring other external funding sources.
Cities can contribute directly by:
1. Developing local pools of funding . For example, until recently, MV had a fund of $69 M to finance AH and support the cost of new infrastructure. (Finding 11 ) Mountain View
built its AH fund through linkage or impact fees (fees imposed on property developers by municipalities for the new infrastructure required to accommodate new development).
These fees are paid by office space developers. Palo Alto, with its annual cap on office space development, has severely restricted this source of funding. 113
2. Waiving or deferring fees where AH is provided. The Montecito project is an example.
3. Negotiating other benefits to have developers include AH units. For example, allowing additional height, less required parking, or increased Floor Area Ratio (FAR), which is the size of a building’s floor area in relation to the parcel size on which the building is located.
For example, a market rate housing project can be transformed by trading increased density
111 Santa Clara County, “Complete Text of Measure A,” accessed August 1, 2021, https://www.sccgov.org/sites/scc/Documents/Complete-Text-of-Measure-A-20.pdf.
112 Donna Kimura, “Silicon Valley Firms Invest in Affordable Housing,” Affordable Housing Finance, February 13, 2019, https://www.housingfinance.com/finance/silicon-valley-firms-invest-in-affordable-housing_o.
113 Gennady Sheyner, “Palo Alto Approves Permanent Office Cap,” Palo Alto Online, May 1, 2018, https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2018/05/01/palo-alto-approves-permanent-office-cap.
a
Packet Pg. 217
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
for more affordable units, or by obligating the developer to build or buy AH elsewhere.
Both MV and PA have used these methods to incentivize housing development. Mountain View has had a greater degree of success, in part because it has been much more aggressive with office development.
4. Contributing city-owned land. The inventory of available city land can have a significant impact on the cost and risk of building AH.
5. Using tax increment financing. As property taxes rise above a base year, the added amount, or the “increment,” could be used to finance AH and/or needed infrastructure. To do this, some of the increase in property tax revenue that has traditionally supported operations like the police and fire departments would be redirected to AH. No new taxes would be required because this is a diversion of property taxes from other services. This approach has long been in use in the United States and elsewhere but has many legal complications that would need to be addressed.
6. Establishing new ongoing sources of revenue by relying on a broader base of payors rather than an individual project developer. Revenue could include new business taxes, fees on real estate activity such as transfer taxes and recording fees , or parcel taxes. Both PA and MV are exploring these opportunities. Mountain View changed its business licensing tax in 2018 and currently raises about $6M per year. At this time, MV intends to spend these funds on capital projects related to commuting activity instead of AH. The increased AH housing targets in the next RHNA cycle may cause MV and PA to consider asking voters to consider increasing local property taxes as part of their funding solution. 114 (Finding 12)
Mountain View’s success in developing a local housing fund enabled the C ity to issue several Notices of Funding Availability (NOFAs). 115 These substantial NOFAs, 2014 ($12.5M) , 2016 ($36M), and 2018 ($22M), encouraged developers to come forward with AH proposals. 116 Mountain View ’s commitment to AH funding set the stage for leveraging other sources of financing to build affordable housing projects.
114 Kevin Forestieri, “Facing a Requirement to Allow 11K New Homes, Mountain View Looks to Update its Housing Plans,” Mountain View Voice, August 16, 2021, https://mv-voice.com/news/2021/08/16/mountain-view- seeks-to-update-housing-plans-following-new-requirement-to-allow-11k-new-homes; Gennady Sheyner, “New Numbers, Same Concerns as Palo Alto Challenges Housing Mandate,” Palo Alto Weekly, January 13, 2021, https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2021/01/13/new-numbers-same-concerns-as-palo-alto-challenges-housing- mandate.
115 Notice of Funding Availability is a public notice issued by a governmental entity which announces the availability of funding for a specific purpose and can be requested through an application process. It is typically awarded competitively for proposals that achieve an outcome desired by that organization.
116 Mark Noack, “Affordable Housing Project Carries Steep Price,” Mountain View Voice, April 20, 2018, https://mv-voice.com/news/2018/04/20/affordable-housing-project-carries-steep-price.
a
Packet Pg. 218
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
100% affordable housing projects vs. mixed-use projects
There are two main types of AH projects. The first is the 100% AH type in which only housing is built, often by a non -profit organization. The second type is a mixed -use project. In mixed -use projects, the developer delivers a combination of occupant units, including some or all of office space, retail space and housing. Mountain View and Palo Alto have differing views on the relative use of these two project types.
The Montecito and La Avenida projects are examples of strong public funding for 100% AH projects. Both projects make use of significant County Measure A funds and MV pooled funds.
That said, building 184 units and 264 bedrooms required committing $34 M, almost 50% of the MV Development Fund. One hundred percent AH projects may be too costly for cities to afford, particularly if cities cap commercial development and the fees or inclusionary units that such development generates.117
An alternative to 100% city-financed AH is the Gateway Master Plan (“Plan ”) announced by MV.118 This large mixed-use project located at the Shoreline Boulevard entrance to MV’s North Bayshore neighborhood is a 29-acre project spanning land owned by Google, Sy West and MV .
The Plan provides for 500,000 square feet of office space, 300,000 square feet of entertainment/restaurants and retail, and a 200-room hotel. After earlier attempts by Google and SyWest to agree on a plan failed, MV took the initiative and proposed this project.
The Gateway Plan provides up to 2,800 residential units. Twenty percent of those units (560) are affordable units. While the publicly accessible plan does not include financing data, the heavy office space and retail space component s create a mixed -use blend that likely makes the project profitable for the two property owners . Mountain View contributed land to the deal and offered zoning that increased the FAR as an incentive. At the time of this report, Google likes the Plan, while SyWest has said it doesn’t meet its profitability requirements. 119
Mixed-use projects typically involve substantial negotiations between a developer and a city.
Developers need zoning concessions (height, parking, density) or other concessions such as reduced city fees. Cities need AH units or other public benefits in return for those concessions.
117 Inclusionary units are affordable housing units that a developer includes in a project —typically at a city - mandated percentage (e.g., 15 or 20%) of the total project units approved.
118 Martin Alkire, North Bayshore Gateway Master Plan.
119Wesley Severson, “Mountain View Pushes Ambitious Development Plans, Developer Calls Them Unrealistic,” Hoodline, August 25, 2021, https://hoodline.com/2021/08/mountain-view-pushes-ambitious- development-plans-developer-calls-them-unrealistic/.
a
Packet Pg. 219
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
Although each project is unique, including profitable office space in the project underpins the developers’ ability to provide AH and other community benefits. Achieving AH goals require that a balance be found between the community’s needs and the developer’s profitability requirements. (Finding 13)
Unintended consequences of a commercial project focused funding approach
In addition to the benefits of mixed-use projects, the Gateway Project poses an important question:
When a city permits more office space to be built, are enough units of AH created to support the service workers needed because of the increased office space? Gateway will generate at least three types of service worker demands:
• The new office buildings will require maintenance, landscaping, food service, and security workers.
• The project’s restaurants, retail, and hotel operations will require service workers.
• There will also be impacts throughout the city - police, fire, teachers, grocery clerks, and others.
A very large percentage of the workers in the list above will be low -income employees and will require AH. At the high end of the Gateway Plan, the project will provide 560 affordable units potentially housing approximately 1,100 service workers. 120 Is that enough? (Finding 14)
Homekey
The State of California has created significant housing funding through Homekey, which combines both state and federal funds.
121 Cities and the County can use these funds to create affordable housing for the homeless and other vul nerable populations. In one such affordable housing implementation, MV has partnered with the State, the County, and a private builder (LifeMoves)
120 Bay Area Council Economic Institute, Technology Works, p. 24-25; Non Profit Housing Association of Northern California, “Jobs/Housing Fit and the Effects on Bay Area Health, Equity and Environment,” accessed December 10, 2021, https://nonprofithousing.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/JH-Fit-Fact-Sheet-FINAL-9.15.pdf.
121 California Department of Housing and Community Development, Homekey: Bringing California Home, accessed September 23, 2021, https://homekey.hcd.ca.gov; H. Blair Kincer, “Homekey Program Provides Additional Subsidy for Affordable Housing Development Across California,” Novogradac, November 19, 2020, https://www.novoco.com/notes-from-novogradac/homekey-program-provides-additional-subsidy-affordable- housing-development-across-california; Wesley Severson, “Mountain View Pushes Ambitious Development Plans.,” Hoodline.
a
Packet Pg. 220
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
to construct 100 units and 124 beds of Homekey housing.122 The Homekey funding for this project is $14.4M . Occupancy began in the s pring of 2021. Palo Alto is also considering a similar Homekey project.
The Homekey/LifeMoves target population in MV is homeless families, seniors, and disabled individuals. This program is intended to house people for 4-6 months, and they will subsequently need to find permanent AH.
122 City of Mountain View, LifeMoves Mountain View Now Providing a Path to Stability for Individuals and Families Experiencing Homelessness, May 6, 2021,
https://www.mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=35478 .
a
Packet Pg. 221
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Finding 1
The Civil Grand Jury commends the City of Mountain View for prioritizing and exhibiting strong, visible support for affordable housing and progress towards Regional Housing Needs Allocation targets.
No recommendation.
Finding 2
The Civil Grand Jury commends the City of Mountain View for creating a multi- tiered communication plan that both communicates the value of affordable housing to all stakeholders and addresses their issues. This has engendered strong community support for affordable housing leading to many successful projects.
No recommendation.
Finding 3
The Palo Alto City Council has not taken a leadership role in developing community support for affordable housing planning and projects.
Recommendation 3
The City of Palo Alto should research how other cities foster support for affordable housing and develop a communication plan focused on increasing community support for affordable housing.
The plan should be developed and made available to the public by June 30, 2022.
Finding 4
Palo Alto City councilmembers do not play a strong enough leadership role in personally engaging in community education and discussion to aid in resident acceptance of affordable housing.
Recommendation 4
The City of Palo Alto should conduct a “lessons learned” analysis from the 4- year unsuccessful North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan planning process. The City of Palo Alto should create an a
Packet Pg. 222
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
improved process to bring residents to a shared understanding of the needs and complexities of affordable housing development. This process should include direct involvement of Palo Alto City elected leaders in community outreach. These recommendations should be completed by June 30, 2022.
Finding 5
The Housing Element Plan and land- use changes are foundational to supporting affordable housing, but they are not enough. Affordable housing also needs cities to create area-specific land- use and zoning plans like the City of Mountain View’s Precise Plans . Mountain View has also prioritized affordable housing development by using its planning processes to specifically identify a set of projects and actions within a concrete time frame. The City of Mountain View is to be commended for both its use of Precise Plans and its short-term City Strategic Planning process.
No recommendation.
Finding 6
The City of Palo Alto’s multiplicity of planning policies and documents creates lengthy processes and can lead to frustration for all parties, including neighborhoods as well as developers. The City of Palo Alto does not have a comprehensive set of plans organized by area or neighborhood that include all zoning elements and regulations that could support AH. Current plans do not clearly and concisely identify where affordable housing could be built with design and density acceptable to the City of Palo Alto and the community.
Recommendation 6a
The City of Palo Alto should identify, by March 31, 2022, three or four areas where significant affordable housing can be built.
Recommendation 6b
The City of Palo Alto should agree, by June 30, 2022, to task its planners to create realistic plans for each identified area in consultation with residents and developers.
Finding 7
Mountain View Planning Division’s summary memo to the Mountain View City Council provides a clear, concise update on progress toward Housing Element goals. The City of Mountain View is commended for the clarity and conciseness of its Annual Housing Element Progress Update to the a
Packet Pg. 223
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
Mountain View City Council. However, t he Annual Housing Element Progress Updates with cover memos to the Mountain View City Council cannot be found easily by the public on the city’s website.
Recommendation 7
The City of Mountain View should publish its Annual Housing Element U pdates and the summaries (in an appropriate form) on the city’s website by June 30, 2022.
Finding 8
Combining the City of Palo Alto’s Housing Element Annual Update and the Comprehensive Plan Update with one cover memo does not communicate city progress in either area clearly.
Recommendation 8
The City of Palo Alto should publish the latest two years of its Housing Element Annual Updates and cover memos summarizing annual progress to the city’s website by June 30, 2022. To better communicate to the public, the Housing Element Annual Updates and the Comprehensive Plan Updates should be separated.
Finding 9
The length of time it takes developers to get their plans approved is significantly higher in the City of Palo Alto compared to the City of Mountain View. This discourages developers from proposing residential development in Palo Alto.
Recommendation 9a
Once the guidelines for developments are clearly defined in area plans, the Palo Alto City Council preliminary review could be eliminated. The City of Palo Alto should establish a schedule by June 30, 2022, for defining and accepting the area plans identified in Recommendation 6a.
Recommendation 9b
The City of Palo Alto should explore combining the Planning and Transportation Commission and Architectural Review Board reviews into a single review, as is done in Mountain View. Palo Alto City staff should also c onsult with Mountain View planners to investigate ways to further a
Packet Pg. 224
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
streamline the approval process. Recommendations for changes to the planning review process should be proposed by June 30, 2022.
Finding 10
Developers (both for-profit and non-profit) find it very useful to work with a designated individual who is responsible for the affordable housing target and coordinates all activities across developers, funding sources, city council, planning departments, and other stakeholders to enable progress on projects.
Recommendation 10a
The City of Palo Alto should identify an Affordable Housing Manager who can be responsible for the affordable housing target and ensure coordination among stakeholders by June 30, 2022. This role should be the primary focus of this individual and should have the support of Palo Alto’s City Council.
Recommendation 10b
The Cit y of Mountain View should identify an Affordable Housing Manager who can be responsible for the affordable housing target and ensure coordination among stakeholders by June 30, 2022. This role should be the primary focus of this individual and should have the support of Mountain View’s City Council.
Finding 11
In the past decade, the City of Mountain View has created substantial affordable housing funding derived both from C ity revenues (fees, charges to developers, etc.) and from external funding.
However, the City of Mountain View’s fund is diminishing and needs to be built up.
Recommendation 11
The City of Mountain View should develop a specific affordable housing funding plan to cover its needs for the next five years by July 30, 2022.
a
Packet Pg. 225
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
Finding 12
The City of Palo Alto does not have a multi-faceted affordable housing funding strategy (including creating a fund for affordable housing as well as proactively leveraging all potential external funding sources) that would encourage it to build more below market housing.
Recommendation 12a
The City of Palo Alto should create a plan with specific goals and timelines by July 30, 2022, to build up the affordable housing fund considering tools such as business tax, document tax, bond measure, and property tax.
Recommendation 12b
The City of Palo Alto should create a Memorandum of Understanding with Santa Clara County by July 30, 2022, to establish goals and actions to leverage Measure A bond funding and advance identified affordable housing projects.
Finding 13
One hundred percent affordable housing projects are more reliant on scarce city funds and other resources compared to mixed-use projects that combine housing with commercial space . Having a city-wide portfolio of both 100% affordable housing projects and mixed-use projects will yield the greatest number of units and best utilize available funds.
Recommendation 13
The City of Palo Alto should include both mixed-use and 100% affordable funding opportunities in its affordable housing plan referred to in Recommendation 12a by July 30, 2022.
Finding 14
Relying on commercial development to fund affordable housing has the unintended consequence of increasing the need for affordable housing.
a
Packet Pg. 226
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
Recommendation 14
By July 30, 2022, both the City of Palo Alto and the City of Mountain View should require a Housing Impact Study in the approval process for new commercial development, that informs decision-makers about how the proposed project affects the job-to-housing ratio.
a
Packet Pg. 227
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
REQUIRED RESPONSES
Pursuant to Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05, the Civil Grand Jury requests responses as follows from the following governing bodies:
Responding Agency
Finding Recommendation
The City of Mountain View
7, 10, 11, 14 7, 10b, 11, 14
The City of Palo Alto 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10,
12, 13, 14
3, 4, 6a, 6b, 8, 9 a, 9b, 10a,
12a, 12b, 13, 14
a
Packet Pg. 228
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
REFERENCES
2016-2017 Civil Grand Jury of Los Angeles County. “Affordable Housing,” Final Report.
Accessed November 13, 2021, http://grandjury.co.la.ca.us/pdf/LOSANGELESCOUNTY2016- 2017CIVILGRANDJURYFINALREPORT.pdf.
2017-2018 Civil Grand Jury of Santa Clara County, “Affordable Housing Crisis: Density is our Destiny,” June 21, 2018.
https://www.scscourt.org/court_divisions/civil/cgj/2018/BMRH%20Rpt%202018-06- 19%20REVISED%20FINAL.pdf.
2019-2020 Civil Grand Jury of Santa Barbara County. “Homelessness in Santa Barbara County:
Our Everyday Epidemic.” Accessed November 12, 2021,
http://www.sbcgj.org/2020/homeless.pdf.
–––. “Affordable Housing in Santa Barbara: An Oxymoron?” Accessed November 14, 2021, http://www.sbcgj.org/2020/AffordableHousing.pdf.
Alkire, Martin. North Bayshore Gateway Master Plan: Public Draft – August 2021. Accessed November 13, 2021, https://www.mv-voice.com/news/reports/1629396384.pdf.
Association of Bay Area Governments. San Francisco Bay Area Progress in Meeting 2007-2014 Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA), September 2015. Accessed June 15, 2021, https://abag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/rhnaprogress2007_2014_082815.pdf .
Aurand, Andrew, Dan Emmanuel, Daniel Threet, Ikra Rafi, Diane Yentel. The GAP: A Shortage of Affordable Homes: Appendix B: Metropolitan, March 2021. https://reports.nlihc.org/sites/default/files/gap/Gap-Report_2021.pdf .
Ballotpedia. “Mountain View, California, Rent Control City Charter Amendment, Measure V November 2016.” Accessed November 7, 2021,
https://ballotpedia.org/Mountain_View,_California,_Rent_Control_City_Charter_Amendment,_ Measure_V_(November_2016).
Bay Area Council Economic Institute. Technology Works: High-Tech Employment and Wages in the United States, December 2012. Accessed November 13, 2021, http://www.bayareaeconomy.org/files/pdf/TechReport.pdf.
Bay Area Equity Atlas. “Housing Burden: Nine-County Bay Area vs. California.” Accessed November 27, 2021, https://bayareaequityatlas.org/indicators/housing-burden#/ ’.
a
Packet Pg. 229
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
Burt, Patrick. “My Top 3 Priorities,” Voters’ Edge California, November 3, 2020, https://votersedge.org/ca/en/election/2020-11-03/santa-clara-county/city-council-city-of-palo- alto/patrick-burt.
California Department of Housing and Community Development. Homekey: Bringing California Home. Accessed September 23, 2021, https://homekey.hcd.ca.gov .
–––. “Housing Elements,” 2021. Accessed November 7, 2021, https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housing-element/index.shtml .
–––. Regional Housing Needs Allocation: 5th Cycle. Accessed July 17, 2021, https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/rhna/index.shtml.
California Government Code § 54956.8. Accessed November 7, 2021, https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV§ionNu m=54956.8.
California Housing Partnership. Santa Clara County 2021 Affordable Housing Needs Report.
Accessed November 13, 2021, https://1p08d91kd0c03rlxhmhtydpr-wpengine.netdna- ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Santa-Clara_Housing_Report.pdf.
Committee to House the Bay Area (CASA). CASA Compact: A 15-Year Emergency Policy Package to Confront the Housing Crisis in the San Francisco Bay Area, Jan. 2019, p.12, https://mtc.ca.gov/tools-and-resources/digital-library/casa-compact .
City of Gilroy. What is Affordable Housing in Santa Clara County? Accessed November 13, 2021, https://www.cityofgilroy.org/DocumentCenter/View/11636/Affordable-Housing-101-and- FAQs.
City of Morgan Hill. 2021 Housing Conversation. Accessed July 8, 2021, https://www.morgan-
hill.ca.gov/2162/2021-Housing-Conversation.
City of Mountain View. 2015-2023 Housing Element, October 14, 2014. https://www.mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=15284.
–––. City Council Major Goals for Fiscal Years 2019-20 and 2020-2021. Accessed August 23, 2021, https://www.mountainview.gov/council/goals.asp.
a
Packet Pg. 230
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
–––. Community Development. 2020 Housing Element Annual Progress Report. March 23, 2021.
–––. East Whisman Precise Plan. Accessed August 17, 2021, https://www.mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=32005 .
–––. El Camino Real Precise Plan. Accessed August 21, 2021, https://www.mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=29701.
–––. Environmental Planning Commission. “Staff Report, 2020 Housing Element Progress Report,” March 3, 2021.
https://mountainview.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4811887&GUID=31D36D2F- EA70-4326-BE48-2026143531E0&Options=&Search=.
–––. FY 2019-20 through FY 2020-21 City Council Major Goals Work Plan, April 25, 2019. https://www.mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=29232 .
–––. Gateway Master Plan. Accessed August 21, 2021,
https://www.mountainview.gov/depts/comdev/planning/activeprojects/gateway_master_plan.asp.
–––. General Plan and Housing Element. Accessed August 24, 2021, https://www.mountainview.gov/depts/comdev/planning/regulations/general.asp.
–––. LifeMoves Mountain View Now Providing a Path to Stability for Individuals and Families Experiencing Homelessness, May 6, 2021.
https://www.mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=35478 .
–––. North Bayshore Precise Plan: North Bayshore Affordable Housing Administrative Guidelines. Accessed August 21, 2021,
https://www.mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=22584.
–––. Precise Plans. Accessed August 18, 2021,
https://www.mountainview.gov/depts/comdev/planning/regulations/precise.asp.
–––. Previous City Council Major Goals Fiscal Years 2017-19 and 2018-19I. Accessed November 12, 2021, https://www.mountainview.gov/council/goals.asp#previousgoals.
–––. Strategic Priorities. Accessed Aug. 17, 2021,
https://www.mountainview.gov/council/strategic_planning_and_visioning.asp.
a
Packet Pg. 231
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
–––. Strategic Roadmap Action Plan for Fiscal Years 2021-22 and 2022-23, April 23, 2021. https://www.mountainview.gov/council/strategic_planning_and_visioning.asp.
City of Palo Alto. 2015-2023 Housing Element City of Palo Alto, 2014. Accessed November 7, 2021, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/planning-amp-development- services/housing-element/housingelement_2015_2023/complete-public-hearing-draft-09-17-
14.pdf.
–––. 2030 Comprehensive Plan, Land Use and Community Design Element. Accessed August 21, 2021, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/planning-amp-development- services/3.-comprehensive-plan/comprehensive-plan/2030-comp-plan-2-land-use-june-21.pdf.
–––. “2755 El Camino, Attachments.” Accessed December 3, 2021, https://aca- prod.accela.com/paloalto/Cap/CapDetail.aspx?Module=Planning&TabName=Planning&capID1 =16PLN&capID2=00000&capID3=00234&agencyCode=PALOALTO&IsToShowInspection=n o; https://aca-
prod.accela.com/paloalto/Cap/CapDetail.aspx?Module=Planning&TabName=Planning&capID1 =16PLN&capID2=00000&capID3=00464&agencyCode=PALOALTO&IsToShowInspection=n o.
–––. “788-796 San Antonio Road, Attachments.” Accessed December 3, 2021, https://aca-
prod.accela.com/paloalto/Cap/CapDetail.aspx?Module=Planning&TabName=Planning&capID1 =19PLN&capID2=00000&capID3=00084&agencyCode=PALOALTO&IsToShowInspection=n o.
–––. City Council Staff Report ID#10950, Housing Work Plan Update, January 21, 2020. https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/reports/city-manager- reports-cmrs/year-archive/2020/id-10950.pdf.
–––. City Council Staff Report ID#11472, Inclusionary Below Market Rate Feasibility Study, September 21, 2020.
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes- reports/reports/city-manager-reports-cmrs/year-archive/2020-2/id-11472.pdf.
–––. City Council Staff Report ID#11838, 2020 Comprehensive Plan and Housing Element Annual Progress Reports, March 15, 2021.
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/reports/city-manager- reports-cmrs/2021/id-11838.pdf.
a
Packet Pg. 232
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
–––. City Council Staff Report ID#11930, NVCAP – Review Plan Alternatives, June 14, 2021. https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/reports/city-manager- reports-cmrs/2021/id-11930.pdf.
–––. City Council Staff Report ID#12270, Presentation of the Annual Community Survey Results, May 17, 2021.
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes- reports/reports/city-manager-reports-cmrs/2021/id-12270.pdf.
–––. City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, November 13, 2017. https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Planning-Development-Services/Long-Range- Planning/2030-Comprehensive-Plan.
–––. Colleagues’ Memo, No. 63027, November 6, 2019.
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/reports/city-manager- reports-cmrs/year-archive/2017/id-8630-colleagues-memo.pdf.
–––. Colleagues’ Memo, No. 73361, Sept. 23, 2019.
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/reports/city-manager- reports-cmrs/year-archive/2019/id-10548-colleagues-memo.pdf
–––. Housing Element (2015-2023). Accessed August 24, 2021, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Planning-and-Development-Services/Long-Range- Planning/Housing-Policies-and-Programs/Housing-Element-2015-2023.
–––. Housing Work Plan, February 2018 Draft. Accessed November 12, 2021, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/planning-amp-development- services/2018_01_26_housing_work_plan_final.pdf.
–––. Municipal Code Ordinance No. 5460. April 1, 2019.
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/71494 .
–––. Priority Development Areas (PDAs) and Priority Conservation Areas (PCAs), April 22, 2021. https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/News-articles/Planning-and-Development- Services/Priority-Development-Areas-PDAs-and-Priority-Conservation-Areas-PCAs.
–––. South of Forest Area Coordinated Plan, December 2003. Accessed November 13, 2021, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/planning-amp-development-services/file- migration/current-planning/forms-and-guidelines/south-of-forest-coordinated-area-plan-phase-
2.pdf.
a
Packet Pg. 233
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
Committee to House the Bay Area. CASA Compact, January 2019. https://mtc.ca.gov/sites/default/files/CASA_Compact.pdf.
County of Santa Clara. “Complete Text of Measure A.” Accessed August 1, 2021, https://www.sccgov.org/sites/scc/Documents/Complete-Text-of-Measure-A-20.pdf.
Destination Home. Understanding Homelessness in Santa Clara County. Accessed September 28, 2021, https://destinationhomesv.org/understanding-homelessness/numbers/.
Dickens, Charles. A Tale of Two Cities. New York: Penguin Books, 2000.
DuBois, Tom. “Re-Elect Tom DuBois for Palo Alto City Council.” Accessed September 21, 2021, https://www.votedubois.com.
Escalante, Eric. “California’s Growth Rate at Record Low as More People Leave,” ABC10 Breaking News, December 16, 2020.
https://www.abc10.com/article/news/local/california/californias-growth-rate-at-record-low-as- more-people-leave/103-3f814e19-ffe1-44af-90c0-a49168be4a60.
Forestieri, Kevin. “Facing a Requirement to Allow 11K New Homes, Mountain View Looks to Update its Housing Plans,” Mountain View Voice, August 16, 2021. https://mv- voice.com/news/2021/08/16/mountain-view-seeks-to-update-housing-plans-following-new- requirement-to-allow-11k-new-homes.
–––. “Mountain View City Council Earmarks $16M for Costly New 84-Unit Affordable Housing Project,” Mountain View Voice, June 28, 2021.
https://www.mv-
voice.com/news/2021/06/28/mountain-view-city-council-earmarks-16m-for-costly-new-84-unit- affordable-housing-project.
–––. “Mountain View Pours $15M into North Bayshore’s First Affordable Housing Project, Mountain View Voice, December 14, 2020.
https://mv-voice.com/news/2020/12/14/mountain-
view-pours-15m-into-north-bayshores-first-affordable-housing-project.
Goda, Thomas, Chris Stewart, and Alejandro Torres Garcia. Absolute Income Inequality and Rising House Prices, December 1, 2016.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2886481 .
Hansen, Louis. “Fierce, 7-Year NIMBY Battle in Palo Alto Reaches a Conclusion: Big $5 Million Homes Rise on Site Once Eyed for Affordable Senior Units,” Mercury News, June 23, a
Packet Pg. 234
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
2020. https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/06/23/fierce-7-year-nimby-battle-in-palo-alto- reaches-a-luxury-conclusion/.
Harrison, Sophia. Ethics Study: Silicon Valley Housing Crisis, March 19, 2021. https://sevenpillarsinstitute.org/ethics-study-silicon-valley-housing-crisis/.
Hirsch, Joseph. “Guest Opinion: A Neighborhood Perspective of Maybell Avenue Development,” Palo Alto Weekly, July 16, 2016.
https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2016/07/16/guest-opinion-a-neighborhood-perspective-of- maybell-avenue-development.
Hoch, Charles. “How Plan Mandates Work: Affordable Housing in Illinois,” Journal of the American Planning Association v. 73, no. 1 (Winter 2007).
Hodges, Whitney and Talya Gulezyan. “California Enacts New Legislation to Combat Growing Housing Crisis, But Not Without Controversy,” National Law Review, September 20, 2021. https://www.natlawreview.com/article/california-enacts-new-legislation-to-combat-growing- housing-crisis-not-without.
Johnson, Nikie and Jeff Collins. “Report Card: California Cities, Counties Failing Again on Affordable Housing Goals,” Orange County Register, January 31, 2021. https://www.ocregister.com/2021/01/31/report-card-california-cities-counties-failing-again-on- affordable-housing-goals/.
Joint Venture Silicon Valley, Institute for Regional Studies. 2021 Index Highlights, 2021. https://jointventure.org/publications/silicon-valley-index.
Jun, Hee-Jung. “The Link Between Local Comprehensive Plans and Housing Affordability,” Journal of the American Planning Association v. 83, no. 3 (Summer 2017).
Kalev, Alexandra, Frank Dobbin, and Erin Kelly. “Best Practices or Best Guesses? Assessing the Efficacy of Corporate Affirmative Action and Diversity Practices,” American Sociological Review v. 71, no. 4 (2006).
Keehn, Suzanne. Letter to City Council, “Fw: NVCAP,” June 14, 2021. https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/planning-amp-development-services/north- ventura-cap/all-public-comments_1.pdf.
a
Packet Pg. 235
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
Kendall, Marisa. “How Can We Solve the Bay Area Housing Crisis? Build 160,000 Affordable Homes,” Mercury News, March 18, 2021. https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/03/18/how-can- we-solve-the-bay-area-housing-crisis-build-160000-affordable-homes/.
Kincer, H. Blair. “Homekey Program Provides Additional Subsidy for Affordable Housing Development Across California,” Novogradac, November 19, 2020. https://www.novoco.com/notes-from-novogradac/homekey-program-provides-additional- subsidy-affordable-housing-development-across-california.
Kopp, Carol M. “Income Inequality,” Investopedia, November 2, 2021. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/income-inequality.asp .
Levitsky, Allison. “Palo Alto Council Unanimously Approves Affordable Housing Project,” Daily Post, January 15, 2019.
https://padailypost.com/2019/01/15/palo-alto-council-
unanimously-approves-affordable-housing-project/.
Lloyd, Sam. “Managers Must Delegate Effectively to Develop Employees.” Accessed August 15, 2021,
https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/organizational-and-employee- development/pages/delegateeffectively.aspx.
Noack, Mark. “Affordable Housing Project Carries Steep Price,” Mountain View Voice, April 20, 2018. https://mv-voice.com/news/2018/04/20/affordable-housing-project-carries-steep-price .
Non Profit Housing Association of Northern California. “Jobs/Housing Fit and the Effects on Bay Area Health, Equity and Environment.” Accessed December 10, 2021. https://nonprofithousing.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/JH-Fit-Fact-Sheet-FINAL-9.15.pdf
Pai, Deanna. “5 Ways Your Commute Affects Your Health,” Keck Medicine of USC. Accessed June 7, 2021, https://www.keckmedicine.org/commuting-and-your-health/ .
Sanders, Rebecca. “PAN’s Outreach to the Community Regarding the NVCAP2 Survey,” April 16, 2020.
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/planning-amp-development- services/north-ventura-cap/survey-emails-only.pdf?t=42004.46.
Severson, Wesley. “Mountain View Pushes Ambitious Development Plans, Developer Calls them Unrealistic,” Hoodline, August 25, 2021,
https://hoodline.com/2021/08/mountain-view-
pushes-ambitious-development-plans-developer-calls-them-unrealistic/.
a
Packet Pg. 236
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
Schaefer, Annette. “Commuting Takes Its Toll,” Scientific American Mind v. 16, no. 3, pp. 14- 15, October 1, 2005. Accessed December 2, 2021,
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/commuting-takes-its-toll/.
Sheyner, Gennady. “Facing Concerns from College Terrace, City Looks to Reassert Commitment to Single-Family Housing Zones,” Palo Alto Weekly, April 7, 2021, https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2021/04/07/facing-concerns-from-college-terrace-city- looks-to-reassert-commitment-to-single-family-housing-zones.
–––. “First Affordable-Housing Project in Seven Years Wins Approval: City Council Supports 59-Unit Development on El Camino Real,” Palo Alto Weekly, January 14, 2019, https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2019/01/14/affordable-housing-project-wins-approval-in- palo-alto.
–––. “New Numbers, Same Concerns as Palo Alto Challenges Housing Mandate,” Palo Alto Weekly, January 13, 2021.
https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2021/01/13/new-numbers- same-concerns-as-palo-alto-challenges-housing-mandate.
–––. “Palo Alto Approves Permanent Office Cap,” Palo Alto Online, May 1, 2018. https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2018/05/01/palo-alto-approves-permanent-office-cap.
–––. “What’s Measure D Really About?” Palo Alto Online, October 11, 2013, https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2013/10/11/whats-measure-d-really-about.
–––. “With No Consensus in Sight, Palo Alto’s Vision for Ventura Gets Murky,” Palo Alto Weekly, June 10, 2021. https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2021/06/10/with-no-consensus-in- sight-palo-altos-vision-for-ventura-gets-murky.
Skelton, George. ”Don’t Be Fooled, California’s New Housing Laws Are Game-Changers,” Mercury News, September 24, 2021. https://ourcommunitynow.com/lifestyle/skelton-dont-be- fooled-californias-new-housing-laws-are-significant.
Stone, Greer. “Greer Stone Palo Alto City Council.” Accessed Sept. 21, 2021, http://www.greerstone.com/GStone2020/home.asp.
Tenants Together. July 2019.
https://www.tenantstogether.org/resources/mountain-view-tenants- coalition-mvtc.
a
Packet Pg. 237
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
TownCharts.com. “Figure 32: Number of Owners vs. Renters in Mountain View, CA and Area.” Accessed August 16, 2021, https://www.towncharts.com/California/Housing/Mountain-View- city-CA-Housing-data.html.
Woetzel, Jonathan, Jan Mischke, Shannon Peloquin, and Daniel Weisfield. A Tool Kit to Close California’ Housing Gap, October 2016.
https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/public%20and%20social%20sector/our %20insights/closing%20californias%20housing%20gap/closing-californias-housing-gap-full- report.pdf.
Wood, James, Dejan Esikic, D.J. Benway, and Kathryn Macdonald-Poelman. Housing Affordability: What Are Best Practices and Why Are They Important? November 2020. https://gardner.utah.edu/wp-content/uploads/Best-Practices-Dec2020.pdf.
a
Packet Pg. 238
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: A TALE OF TWO CITIES
This report was ADOPTED by the 2021 Civil Grand Jury of Santa Clara County on this __________ day of _______________, 2021.
______________________________
Ms. Karen Delaney
Foreperson
a
Packet Pg. 239
OVERVIEW
The City of Palo Alto appreciates the Grand Jury’s detailed work on this important issue. We agree with many of the Grand Jury’s recommendations. We thank the Grand Jury for its time and consideration.
We believe that the strongest parts of the report were useful ideas for streamlining housing review and approval processes; and the section on financing dynamics for Affordable Housing
1. Palo Alto Affordable Housing Supply
Palo Alto has long had one of the County’s stronger records in supporting affordable housing and ranks second among cities in the County for affordable housing production as a percentage of total housing.
Even compared to larger communitie s such as Sunnyvale and Mountain View , Palo Alto has many hundreds more affordable housing units (see Figure 1).
Figure 1 Below Market Rate Housing as a % of Total Housing Stock
2. “Net-of-Demand” Impacts of Developments on Affordable Housing.
The Grand Jury study focuses strictly on new production during the period from 2015 to 2019. During this period Palo Alto was among the first on the Peninsula to adopt policies to address housing demand, and not just supply. Palo Alto has also maintained and renovated existing affordable housing stock to maintain approximately 8% of its total housing inventory as affordable housing.
A fundamental issue jurisdictions are struggling with is that a given land-use policy or project can simultaneously influence both the supply and demand for affordable housing. Whether cities consider both the demand and supply impacts, or just the supply in isolation, makes an enormous difference in how to evaluate a project’s housing availability and affordability impacts.
b
Packet Pg. 240
When demand is considered (Appendix 1), during the 2015 -19 period neither Palo Alto nor Mountain View effectively increased their affordable housing. Instead, both cities saw declines in it with Mountain View experiencing more than five times the decline as Palo Alto (Figure 2).
Figure 2 Affordable Housing Supply vs “Net-of-Demand” Affordable Housing Supply
“Net-of-demand,” the two cities ’ total production was not a 596-unit gain , but a 3,411-unit loss.
Although the RHNA process counts only the gain, the loss leaves several thousand actual lower-income residents with no nearby place to live.
This issue is of particular relevance to mixed-use plans, in which housing supply and demand are created directly together. Palo Alto believes that in the mid-Peninsula, the economics of private developer investment now make for-profit mixed-use projects with positive “net-of-demand” affordable housing nearly impossible without subsidies. For example, one North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan (NVCAP) property owner has proposed to build 508 new housing units, including 76 affordable (<120% AMI), in exchange for approval of 200,000 s quare feet of new office space (Appendix 2). Per the “Adjusted KM 2016” demand model in Appendix 1, the commercial component would create a new affordable housing need of 232 units — three times the project’s supply. Whether approv ing this project counts as an increase of 76 affordable units or a loss of 156 depends on whether one considers demand.
Such projects have the paradoxical effect of apparently boosting RHNA performance , while actually reducing net availability of affordable housing ; thereby increasing low -income displacement (Appendix 3). W e view this as a structural problem of the current RHNA process. As a result of this dynamic, w e believe cities with expensive land and high jobs-housing ratios, like our own, should be very cautious to use the Mixed-Use approach. This issue will reappear multiple times in our response to the Grand Jury recommendations.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Finding 1
The Civil Grand Jury commends the City of Mountain View for prioritizing and exhibiting strong, visible support for affordable housing and progress towards Regional Housing Needs Allocation targets.
City of Palo Alto Response: NA
Finding 2
New AH Supply 2015-2019 New N ew AH Supply
City (Supply-Only) New Jobs AH Demand (Net-of-Demand)
Palo Alto 166 4,174 671 (505)
Mountain View 430 20,748 3,336 (2,906)
Total 2 Cities 596 24,922 4,007 (3,411)
Sources: Grand Jury Report, ACS 5-yr data, 0.67/24% model Appendix 1) b
Packet Pg. 241
The Civil Grand Jury commends the City of Mountain View for creating a multi -tiered communication plan that both communicates the value of affordable housing to all stakeholders and addresses their issues. This has engendered strong community support for affordable housing leading to many successful projects.
City of Palo Alto Response: NA
Finding 3
The Palo Alto City Council has not taken a leadership role in developing community support for affordable housing planning and projects.
City of Palo Alto Response: Partially Agree / Partially Disagree The City disagrees that the Counc il has not taken a leadership role in developing support for affordable housing planning initiatives and projects once they are identified. Specifically, each of the last two years, the City Council adopted “Housing for Social and Economic Balance” as one of its four city “Priorities”. Councilmembers actively participate in neighborhood meetings and the City actively championed the Buena Vista rescue ($15M) project and filed an eminent domain action to preserve Buena Vista. The City financially supported the Wilton Court project ($22M), and the 231 Grant Affordable Teacher-Housing project ($3M). Councilmembers have also advocated for a land -use strategy tha t balances new jobs and new housing creation, and zoning actions (P lanned Home Zoning (PHZ), H ousing Incentive Program (HIP) and Affordable Housing Overlay that provides the City’s highest zoning and approval streamlining incentives for Affordable Housing projects. Recently, the Council initiated an RFP for piloting housing on city owned parking lots in our downtowns, with a preference for Affordable Housing.
The City agrees that there can be more Council advocacy to initiate and solicit affordable housing projects.
Recommendation 3
The City of Palo Alto should research how other cities foster support for affordable housing and develop a communication plan focused on increasing community support for affordable housing. The plan should be developed and made available to the public by June 30, 2022.
City of Palo Alto Response : The recommendation has not yet been implemented but will be implemented before the end of the 2022 calendar year. Palo Alto will research other jurisdictions within the County and report back to the City Council with a recommended communication strategy intended to increase community support for affordable housing. Part of this communication strategy is anticipated to include actively surveying residents as part of an upcoming business tax ballot initiative ; preliminary results suggest the community is supportive of a portion of the business tax revenue to be used f or affordable housing. Moreover, the City’s website will be updated to include consolidated affordable housing policies and access to other relevant information and documents.
Finding 4
b
Packet Pg. 242
Palo Alto City council members do not play a strong enough leadership role in personally engaging in community education and discussion to aid in resident acceptance of affordable housing.
City of Palo Alto Response: Disagree.
The City Council disagrees with this finding in both that the Council does play an active role in engaging the community on affordable housing policies and projects and our data shows there is already widespread community support and acceptance of below market rate housing. Recent projects, such as the 100% affordable housing project at Wilton Court and 321 Grant Affordable Teacher Housing Project have been supported by both housing advocates and neighborhood groups.
In addition to recent polling for our upcoming business tax ballot measure, the annual citizen survey is a statistically representative survey of residences and indicates widespread support of affordable housing. Recent solicitation of council priorities also indicates support for a focus on below-market rate housing.
For several years, community pushback to development in Palo Alto has focused mainly on additional commercial office projects, and the community has supported office development restrictions, including in mixed-use developments where commercial- driven housing demand exceeds housing supply. This tension, not resistance to affordable housing, has been and continues to be one of the major constraints in the City’s NVCAP planning.
Recommendation 4
The City of Palo Alto should conduct a “lessons learned” analysis from the 4 -year unsuccessful North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan planning process. The City of Palo Alto should create an improved process to bring residents to a shared understanding of the needs and complexities of affordable housing development. This process should include direct involvement of Palo Alto City elected leaders in community outreach. These recommendations should be completed by June 30, 2022.
City of Palo Alto Response: This recommendation will be implemented upon completion of the NVCAP process; however, the recommended timeline of June 2022 is premature. The NVCAP process is not complete, and it is inaccurate to call the planning process unsuccessful.
Specifically, Council has recently provided direction (December 2021) on the preferred concept plan that will become the draft plan reviewed for CEQA compliance and brought back to Council for final adoption. Meanwhile, negotiations with property owners are continuing.
Moreover, while affordable housing is a component of this planning initiative it is not the only project component of community interest ; other s relate to improved circulation , enhanced open space opportunities , balanced growth , and a focus on sustainable development. The NVCAP process cannot be viewed exclusively from the lens of affordable housing. At the appropriate time the City will conduct a best -practice analysis to determine lessons learned regarding the totality of the project.
Finding 5
The Housing Element Plan and land- use changes are foundational to supporting affordable housing, but they are not enough. Affordable housing also needs cities to create area- specific land-use and zoning b
Packet Pg. 243
plans like the City of Mountain View’s Precise Plans. Mountain View has also prioritized affordable housing development by using its planning processes to specifically identify a set of projects and actions within a concrete time frame. The City of Mountain View is to be commended for both its use of Precise Plans and its short-term City Strategic Planning process.
City of Palo Alto Response: NA
Finding 6
The City of Palo Alto’s multiplicity of planning policies and documents creates lengthy processes and can lead to frustration for all parties, including neighborhoods as well as developers. The City of Palo Alto does not have a comprehensive set of plans organized by area or neighborhood that include all zoning elements and regulations that could support AH. Current plans do not clearly and concisely identify where affordable housing could be built with design and density acceptable to the City of Palo Alto and the community.
City of Palo Alto Response: Partially Agree / Partially Disagree.
The City agrees that it does have a multiplicity of planning processes , which may benefit from further rationalization.
We are not persuaded, however, that specific plans are a primary planning tool to achieve more below market rate housing. We believe the primary challenges to affordable housing are economic, and the same economics apply equally in both the presence and absence of specific plans. Palo Alto has successfully done area- specific plans in the past, such as its 1999 -2004 South of Forest Avenue (SOFA) plan.
Among the two main mechanisms for financing below market rate housing, the Grand Jury points out that specific area plans can be particularly helpful in leveraging m ixed-use development. However as previously noted , Palo Alto believes the economics of affordable housing in the Peninsula preclude most practical use of mixed-use development as an affordable housing tool, once “net-of-demand” housing is considered. For this reason, we do not see this as a valid, primary approach. The other primary funding mechanism, 100% affordable housing projects using public funds, does not derive as much benefit from specific plans.
Recommendation 6a
The City of Palo Alto should identify, by March 31, 2022, three or four areas where significant affordable housing can be built.
City of Palo Alto Response: This recommendation has been implemented. Affordable housing is permissible throughout the city where multifami ly and commercial development is allowed.
Under its Housing Incentive Plan (HIP), t he City has also identified three specific large zoning districts where affordable housing developers can take advantage of increased development incentives that convey more benefits than can be achieved through state density bonus law. For 100% affordable housing projects, t hese three areas include the CS , CN and CC -2 zoned properties along El Camino Real, the C C-2 zoned properties around California Avenue and CD-C zoned properties Downtown (University Avenue ). These projects are also allowed streamlined approval processes. Additionally, the City is currently updating its housing site inventory , b
Packet Pg. 244
programs and policies for our Housing Element which is anticipated to identify further opportunities in various areas of the City, including along Fabian Way and San Antonio Road.
Recommendation 6b
The City of Palo Alto should agree, by June 30, 2022, to task its planners to create realistic plans for each identified area in consultation with residents and developers.
City of Palo Alto Response: This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted; as described above, we believe specific plans are not required for affordable housing production, especially for non-profit and publicly-funded projects.
We believe the primary challenges to affordable housing are economic, and the same economics apply equally in both the presence and absence of specific plans. Further, the City has a land-use strategy that balances new jobs and new housing creation, and zoning actions (Planned Home Zoning, Housing Incentive Program, Affordable Housing overlay) that specifically target affordable housing without encouraging large, new commercial development. As noted in the City’s response to Recommendation 9b below , the City will also examine opportunities to further streamline its Affordable Housing overlay process.
Finding 7
Mountain View Planning Division’s summary memo to the Mountain View City Council provides a clear, concise update on progress toward Housing Element goals. The City of Mountain View is commended for the clarity and conciseness of its Annual Housing Element Progress Update to the Mountain View City Council. However, the Annual Housing Element Progress Updates with cover memos to the Mountain View City Council cannot be found easily by the public on the city’s website.
City of Palo Alto Response: NA
Recommendation 7
The City of Mountain View should publish its Annual Housing Element Updates and the summaries (in an appropriate form) on the city’s website by June 30, 2022.
City of Palo Alto Response: NA
Finding 8
Combining the City of Palo Alto’s Housing Element Annual Update and the Comprehensive Plan Update with one cover memo does not communicate city progress in either area clearly.
City of Palo Alto Response: Partially Agree / Partially Disagree Combining reports places all relevant information in one place and provides clarity to residents and decision makers, as the Housing Element is a component of the General Plan. The reports are consistent with state reporting requirements. However, it is agreed that the reports can be made more readable and summarize pertinent information to support broader public understanding of the City’s progress.
b
Packet Pg. 245
Recommendation 8
The City of Palo Alto should publish the latest two years of its Housing Element Annual Updates and cover memos summarizing annual progress to the city’s website by June 30, 2022. To better communicate to the public, the Housing Element Annual Updates and the Comprehensive Plan Updates should be separated.
City of Palo Alto Response: The recommendation has been implemented with respect publishing the latest two years of the City’s Housing Element Annual Update on the City’s website. This information is now available online:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Planning-Development-Services/Long-Range- Planning/Housing-Policies-and-Programs/Housing-Element-2015-2023.
City of Palo Alto Response: The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted with respect to separating out the comprehensive plan and housing element annual reports. However, for the 2023 reporting period, staff will explore opportunities to improve the readability and format to achieve the report recommendation.
Finding 9
The length of time it takes developers to get their plans approved is significantly higher in the City of Palo Alto compared to the City of Mountain View. This discourages developers from proposing residential development in Palo Alto.
City of Palo Alto Response: Partially Agree / Partially Disagree We are not familiar with other cities' processes or data on time -to-process. The report cites some anecdotal examples. For code compliant projects, the City’s review processing times a re not anticipated to be significantly greater than other jurisdictions and typically only require review by the City’s Architectural Review Board. There are other applications, including some 100% affordable housing projects or Planned Home Zoning applications that deviate from local zoning standards and require City Council action. While time is certainly a consideration in land use development there are other factors that may entice or discourage a developer from proposing an application, including factors beyond the City’s control.
Recommendation 9a
Once the guidelines for developments are clearly defined in area plans, the Palo Alto City Council preliminary review could be eliminated. The City of Palo Alto should establish a schedule by June 30, 2022, for defining and accepting the area plans identified in Recommendation 6a.
City of Palo Alto Response: The recommendation will not be imple mented because it is not warranted, as discussed under Finding 6 . The City is not persuaded that area plans are inherently a solution to providing more affordable housing. Rather, the City believes the primary challenges to affordable housing are economic, and the same economics apply equally in both the presence and absence of specific plans.
The preliminary review process referenced in the recommendation is voluntary and optional. It is not a requirement for code compliant projects; rather, it is to reduce a developer’s risk of fully b
Packet Pg. 246
developing a non code-compliant project, without some confidence the City Council will view it favorably. We agree the review is not needed for code-compliant projects and in any area- specific plans, should we do them in the future.
Recommendation 9b
The City of Palo Alto should explore combining the Planning and Transportation Commission and Architectural Review Board reviews into a single review, as is done in Mountain View. Palo Alto City staff should also consult with Mountain View planners to investigate ways to further streamline the approval process. Recommendations for changes to the planning review process should be proposed by June 30, 2022.
City of Palo Alto Response: The recommendation requires further analysis. The vast majority of the applications processed in the City do not require review by both the Architectural Review Board and the Planning and Transportation Commission. This is because these bodies have different statutory authority and so by dividing their work, greater efficiency is created and the workload divided among two volunteer bodies.
Some projects seeking an affordable housing overlay approval, which conveys greater height and density than can be achieved with the City’s base zoning requirements, do , however, require review by the City Council, Planning and Transportation Commission , and Architectural Review Board. Prior to June 16, 2022, the Planning and Development Services department will present an option to the City Council to streamline the review of 100% affordable housing projects such that only Architectural Review Board review is required, unless appealed to the City Council. In devel oping its recommendations, staff will consult with Mountain View planners to better understand its approach for streamlining affordable housing projects.
Finding 10
Developers (both for-profit and non-profit) find it very useful to work with a designated individual who is responsible for the affordable housing target and coordinates all activities across developers, funding sources, city council, planning departments, and other stakeholders to enable progress on projects.
City of Palo Alto Response: Agree
The City agrees a designated individual coordinating all affordable housing- related activities would be helpful.
Recommendation 10a
The City of Palo Alto should identify an Affordable Housing Manager who can be responsible for the affordable housing target and ensure coordination among stakeholders by June 30, 2022. This role should be the primary focus of this individual and should have the support of Palo Alto’s City Council.
City of Palo Alto Response : The recommendation requires further analysis. The City sees value in having a single point of contact for affordable housing projects to the extent feasible. Prior to June 16, 2022, as part of the City’s annual budget process, the City Council will consider whether there are sufficient funds to staff such a position or other personnel adjustments to provide dedicated attention to affordable housing projects.
b
Packet Pg. 247
Recommendation 10b
The City of Mountain View should identify an Affordable Housing Manager who can be responsible for the affordable housing target and ensure coordination among stakeholders by June 30, 2022. This role should be the primary focus of this individual and should have the support of Mountain View’s City Council.
City of Palo Alto Response: NA
Finding 11
In the past decade, the City of Mountain View has created substantial affordable housing funding derived both from City revenues (fees, c harges to developers, etc.) and from external funding. However, the City of Mountain View’s fund is diminishing and needs to be built up.
City of Palo Alto Response: NA
Recommendation 11
The City of Mountain View should develop a specific affordable housing funding plan to cover its needs for the next five years by July 30, 2022.
City of Palo Alto Response: NA
Finding 12
The City of Palo Alto does not have a multi -faceted affordable housing funding strategy (including creating a fund for affordable housing as well as proactively leveraging all potential external funding sources) that would encourage it to build more below market housing.
City of Palo Alto Response: Disagree
We think the Grand Jury was simply mistaken here; the City has had such an Affordable Housing Fund for many years. From 2015 -2019 it sourced approximately $40 million for affordable housing efforts, not including associated infrastructure. The fund currently has about $6 million in it and is anticipated to contribute to the transition al-housing project the Council approved in 2021. The City recently increased its commercial housing impact fees and as noted below, is exploring the possibility of a business tax to support in part, affordable housing projects.
Moreover, the City Council r ecently directed its Finance Committee to further explore other affordable housing funding strategies.
Recommendation 12a
The City of Palo Alto should create a plan with specific goals and timelines by July 30, 2022, to build up the affordable housing fund considering tools such as business tax, document tax, bond measure, and property tax
City of Palo Alto Response: This recommendation has been implemented and is scheduled to receive further refinement later this year with a possible business tax ballot initiative. The City b
Packet Pg. 248
has had an Affordable Housing Fund for many years, historically funded primarily through impact and in-lieu fees. Palo Alto has led on inclusionary housing requirements for decades.
In keeping with its view that new commercial development should pay for its associated housing needs, in 2021, the City raised its commercial linkage fee for Affordable Housing to the highest in the Bay Area, $68.50 per square foot, equal to the County’s rate under its “full mitigation” policy as applied to Stanford University.
We are, however, seeking additional new tools to increase the size of our Affordable Housing Fund. One potential funding tool is a business tax, currently in evaluation for the November 2022 ballot, including a spending advisory to contribute to the Affordable Housing Fund. Early polling suggests public sentiment appears to favor such a tax.
Recommendation 12b
The City of Palo Alto should create a Memorandum of Understanding with Santa Clara County by July 30, 2022, to e stablish goals and actions to leverage Measure A bond funding and advance identified affordable housing projects.
City of Palo Alto Response: This recommendation requires further analysis as City staff reach out to the County to assess its willingness to enter into an MOU with Palo Alto; staff will begin these discussions by June 16, 2022.
Measure A funds are not blanket-allocated to local jurisdictions; rather, they are applied to eligible individual affordable housing projects. When eligible projects are proposed for Palo Alto, the City and the developer engage the County regarding the allocation of funds to those projects. Various City representatives have over time been in direct or indirect contact with the County to explore funding opportunities for a variety of projects but no Measure A funds have yet been disbursed for a Palo Alto project at the time of this response.
Finding 13
One hundred percent affordable housing projects are more reliant on scarce city funds and other resources compared to mixed- use projects that combine housing with commercial space. Having a city - wide portfolio of both 100% affordable housing projects and mixed- use projects will yield the greatest number of units and best utilize available funds.
City of Palo Alto Response: Partially Agree / Partially Disagree In general, Palo Alto will support as many 100% affordable projects as can be funded.
In addition, Palo Alto’s policy is to consider both supply and demand for affordable housing. The City’s PHZ zoning incentivizes mixed -use projects but explicitly requires that housing supply exceed job -linked housing demand in those projects. As discussed previously , and also quantitatively in Appendix 3, we do not believe conventional mixed commercial- residential development generally represents a sustainable approach to fund affordable housing in high jobs-housing ratio cities like Palo Alto.
b
Packet Pg. 249
Historically, most agencies – including the Grand Jury – measured only the supply produced by such plans and projects, and not any associated demand. We believe that mixed -use projects that create more housing demand than supply exacerbate the need for affordable housing rather than reduce that need ; and that in high jobs -housing-ratio regions of the Bay Area, this approach is no longer sustainable, and “net-of-demand” is now a better metric.
Recommendation 13
The City of Palo Alto should include both mixed- use and 100% affordable funding opportunities i n its affordable housing plan referred to in Recommendation 12a by July 30, 2022.
City of Palo Alto Response: This recommendation has been and is being implemented. The City’s housing work plan and policies in the new housing element will focus on ensuring projects are net-of-demand housing-positive.
In practice, we anticipate that all 100% affordable projects, but few traditional privately -funded mixed-use projects, will meet this criterion.
Finding 14
Relying on commercial development to fund affordable housing has the unintended consequence of increasing the need for affordable housing.
City of Palo Alto Response: Agree
Using ACS 5-year jobs data and the Adjusted Keyser-Marston model (Appendix 1), Palo Alto and Mountain View together created demand for 4,000 affordable housing units from 2015-2019 --- 3,400 more than the 596 units the two cities actually permitted.
Figure 3: 2015-19 - New Affordable Housing Supply vs New Affordable Housing Demand
Once net-of-demand is measured, this increased 3,400 -unit affordable-housing shortage maps to over 8,000 newly -displaced low-income individuals with no identified place to live (assuming ~2.5 persons per household). The “unintended” consequence described by Finding 14 has b
Packet Pg. 250
concrete human ones. In order to ensure sensible policy, agencies should measure “net -of- demand” affordable housing changes, not simply affordable housing numbers in isolation.
In addition, mixed -use projects that provide more new jobs than housing are also forms of commercial development to fund affordable housing that have the unintended consequences of increasing the need for affordable housing.
Recommendation 14
By July 30, 2022, both the City of Palo Alto and the City of Mountain View should require a Housing Impact Study in the approval process for new commercial development, that informs decision- makers about how the proposed project affects the job-to-housing ratio.
City of Palo Alto Response: This recommendation has been and is being implemented as it relates to the City’s PHZ application process . PHZ projects are required to provide more housing units than needed to offset any net new job generation for commercial land uses. As previously stated, the City limits commercial development through its annual office cap in the zoning code and through land use policies in the comprehensive plan. A Housing Impact Study for other by - right commercial development that is subject to ministerial review, objective standards or design review may be informative to illustrate how a project may be improving or creating more of a jobs/housing imbalance but without actionable policies like the ones employed by Palo Alto, a Housing Impact Study offers little utility and would not likely enable decision-makers to approve or disapprove most projects , unless structured similarly to the PHZ process in Palo Alto.
Numerous nexus and other studies have already established the linkages from commercial development to housing demand, including affordable housing. Additional study is always welcome, but the top factor now is probably agencies’ more consistent adoption of existing Net- of-Demand metrics into land-use policies.
CONCLUSION
The City of Palo Alto appreciates the Grand Jury’s leadership on this important issue. As noted , we agree with several of the Grand Jury’s findings and recommendations and look forward to implementing these items in the coming weeks and months.
As noted, Palo Alto has 8% of its total housing stock as affordable housing. We are proud to have the second highest affordable housing rate of any city in the county based on the percent of total housing stock; and we are addressing the office demand side, which is critical to achieving true progress in meeting the need for affordable housing.
In closing, the City will continue to make progress on this important priority. The City Council recently adopted housing for social and economic balance as a 2022 Council priority and will be adopting a new Housing Element to help guide future affordable housing production. Our Affordable Housing Fund has been an important tool in investing in affordable housing in Palo Alto , and we continue to pursue b
Packet Pg. 251
additional revenue sources to increase this fund as we look to invest in future affordable housing projects.
APPENDICES
1. Affordable-Housing Demand Models
2. Mixed-Use Affordable Housing Proposal in NVCAP
3. RHNA, Recommendation 13, and Mixed-Use Development Economics
4. Housing Supply and Demand
b
Packet Pg. 252
Appendix 1 - AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEMAND MODELS
Housing costs and availability are influenced by changes in both Supply and Demand. Since land-use policies and also individual actions can influence both factors at once, an understanding of linkages is important for planning.
Various studies have analyzed these linkages. One is a 2016 Keyser-Marston Nexus Study commissioned by the Santa Clara County and used during the County’s “GUP” discussions with Stanford University.1
The core principle is that job growth attracts new employees to the region, who need housing. A range of affordability levels is needed, because even high-wage office jobs in fields such as software engineering and biotechnology indirectly create housing demand for workers in associated service, transportation, education and other roles.
A. Summary of the 2016 Keyser-Marston Nexus Study for Santa Clara County (Commercial Linkage)
The 2016 Keyser-Marston study analyzes this linkage by looking at factors such as prevailing industry and income profiles and proportions, the housing demand created by different job categories, and the worker density in both office and residential space. KM 2016 makes the following assumptions:
• 300 square feet of office space per employee
• 1.72 workers per household – KM cites this as the Countywide average • 20% of new jobs sourced by what KM call “declining industry” workers: existing residents who already have housing here, and whose old job is not backfilled by a new employee.
From this, KM calculates that each 100,000 sf of office space creates new households as follows:
• Extremely Low Income (0-30% AMI) 2.6 households 1.7% of total • Very Low Income (30-50% AMI) 12.0 households 7.7% of total • Low Income (50-80% AMI) 22.0 households 14.2% of total
• Moderate Income (80-120% AMI) 30.7 households 19.8% of total • Above Moderate Income (> 120% AMI) 88.0 households 56.6% of total
Per this model, each 1,000 sf of new office space adds 3.3 new jobs, and a demand for 1.6 new households; of which 24% must be 0-80% AMI, and 43% must be 0-120% AMI. Restated, each new office job creates a demand for .47 new households, with the same percentages for 0-80% and 0- 120% AMI respectively. In table form:
b
Packet Pg. 253
B. Suggested Adjustments for North County and Overcrowding
The KM 2016 model is a countywide model, and the factors that go into it likely vary between the South, North and West County regions.
• First, employee density in the tech-heavy North County, where office rents are considerably higher than the County average, in 2022 is likely higher than 3.3 employees per 1,000 sf.
• Second, the cited (2016) County average of 1.72 workers per housing unit may not be best for this calculation. Others including California HCD2 and Working Partnerships USA / Beacon Economics3 argue that current Bay Area housing is “overcrowded” and lower densities should be used for planning. WPUSA/Beacon recommend a planning target of
1.35 workers per housing unit3.
• Finally, an estimate that 20% of new jobs are still being taken by workers leaving declining industries feels high at this time in Silicon Valley and especially in the North County.
An adjustment to the base KM 2016 analysis, using 4.0 employees per 1,000 sf office space, 1.35 workers per household, and 10% of new jobs taken by “declining industry” workers, is shown below as “Adjusted KM 2016.”
Additionally, the City of Mountain View has developed a Jobs-Housing Linkage Program as part of its 2019 East Whisman Precise Plan. The Mountain View standard prescribes 3.0 housing units per 1,000 sf office space, at a 50% inclusion rate (ELI/VLI/LI/MI)
4. These three models are summarized below:
Conclusion
A reasonable range estimate for new housing demand created by office-space development and new jobs in the North County would be:
• Each 1,000 sf office space creates a demand for 1.6-3.0 housing units, at a 24% inclusion rate (ELI/VLI/LI) or a 43% inclusion rate (ELI/VLI/LI/MI)
• Each new job creates a demand for .47-.67 new housing units, at a 24% inclusion rate (ELI/VLI/LI) or a 43% inclusion rate (ELI/VLI/LI/MI)
For Palo Alto, the higher end of these ranges, closer to Mountain View’s, is likely most accurate.
b
Packet Pg. 254
Notes
1. Non-Residential Nexus Analysis, Keyser-Marston Associates, December 2016 https://osh.sccgov.org/sites/g/files/exjcpb671/files/County%20of%20Santa%20Clara%20Affordable %20Housing%20Nexus%20Studies%20Public%20Review%20Draft.%2004-04-2018.pdf Appendix B (Commercial Linkage Analysis) p12
2. HCD Regional Housing Needs Determination: ABAG June 2021 - December 2030, California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)
https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housing-element/docs/abagrhna- final060920(r).pdf
3. The Google Rent Hike, Working Partnerships USA, June 2019 https://www.wpusa.org/files/reports/GoogleRentHike.pdf).
4. Administrative Guidelines for Jobs-Housing Linkage Program, City of Mountain View, 2019 https://www.mountainview.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=33089
Eric Filseth, February 2022
b
Packet Pg. 255
Appendix 2 – MIXED-USE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROPOSAL in NVCAP
Tom Gilman [email protected] Tue 9/14/2021 4:34 PM To: Council, City [email protected]
Cc: Lait, Jonathan <[email protected]>; Tanner, Rachael <[email protected]>; Campbell, Clare <[email protected]>
To the Palo Alto City Council-
In regards to the NVCAP process, the Planning staff has requested from the Jay Paul Company, a response to the concepts presented at the June 2021 City Council meeting.
Based on the Planning documents from that meeting and in discussions with the Staff, the owner needed to take a more detailed look into the numbers to evaluate the potential redevelopment for the 395 Page Mill site.
This has included reviewing several existing conditions:
• Rapidly increasing construction costs
• The considerable investment that he has made to the existing building • Potential buy-out of the existing tenant’s lease and lease extension possibility • Major construction cost of building 2 1/2 levels of underground parking
Based on the considerable financial investment that a redevelopment would entail, the Jay Paul Company would be prepared to go along with a redevelopment of the site based on the following:
• Build 508 new living units in a multifamily project with a 15% affordability (BMR) ratio, built in 6- story and 8-story buildings
• Build an additional 200k sf of tech-office space for a total office area of 420K sf on the site, built in a new 8-story tech-office building
• Include a new 2.3 acre public park, plus significant usable green space setbacks totaling an additional 1.3 acres. On average the existing setbacks are 25’, which would be increased to 30’- 40’.
• 95% of the parking would be housed in a new 2 1/2 level underground parking garage, opening up a significant portion of the site as green space.
o The 9.8 acre acre site would have almost 60% open space, (public + private) compared to the current 25%
• The multi-family residential buildings would be highly sustainable, built to CalGreen standards. • The tech-office buildings would be built to highly sustainable green levels, including LEED Platinum, and Fitwell accredited
• Designing this office building as a Mass-Timber building. This will help ensure that the project is a highly sustainable project with the goal of significant Carbon reduction. • The Jay Paul Company has an on-going relationship with Magical Bridge Foundation, with whom they have worked in Palo Alto and other communities. They will work with them to consider Magical Bridge play spaces in the proposed Park area.
The owner believes that this location is ideal for this transit-oriented development with Caltrain and multiple bus lines within easy walking distance.
b
Packet Pg. 256
Without these levels of additional office space redevelopment, the owner is not motivated to redevelop the site, given the highly successful development with the current tenancy.
The owner looks forward to helping the City make this NVCAP effort a reality and is available for further conversation.
Thank you,
Tom Gilman, AIA
C. Thomas Gilman, AIA, LEED AP
Principal | President
DES Architects + Engineers | 399 Bradford Street | Redwood City, CA 94063 T: 650.364.6453 | [email protected] | www.des-ae.com
| @DESarchitects
Architecture | Interior Design | Landscape Architecture | Structural Engineering | Civil Engineering | Visual Communications | LEED Coordination
b
Packet Pg. 257
Appendix 3 – RHNA, RECOMMENDATION 13, and MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT ECONOMICS How much office space would it take for Palo Alto to have reached 33% of its RHNA Cycle 5 VLI/LI target by 2019 – parity with Mountain View – using the Mixed-Use approach? Per the Grand Jury report, by the end of 2019:
• Palo Alto had reached 15% of its VLI/LI RHNA goals (166 units against a target of 1,123) • Mountain View had reached 33% of its VLI/LI RHNA goal (430 units against a target of 1,306)
A reasonable question is: suppose Palo Alto wished to reach at least 33% of its RHNA Cycle 5 target using Mixed-Use Development, as indicated by Recommendation 13. How much new office space would have been required?
To achieve 33%, an additional 206 VLI/LI units would be needed. The Adjusted KM 2016 model suggests that 206*2.7*1,000 = 550,000 square feet of new office space would have been adequate; however, the Demand Model does not guarantee this rate would also be economically feasible for a developer.
The Jay Paul NVCAP Page Mill proposal (Appendix 2) provides a recent “economic feasibility” Mixed-Use data point. The proposal suggests that 76 VLI/LI units can be financed by 200,000 sf of office space, or 2,630 sf office per unit.
However, the Page Mill proposal includes MI (81-120% AMI) units; whereas the Grand Jury report considers only VLI/LI (0-80% AMI) units. Using the KM 2016 model, we can adjust the 2,630 sf metric by (43%/24%) to suggest a rate of 4,715 sf office per VLI/LI unit is currently economically viable in Palo Alto.
This suggests that in practice, producing the additional 206 VLI/LI units to reach 33%-of-RHNA using Mixed-Use as in Recommendation 13, could have been achieved by Palo Alto approving roughly 970,000 sf of new office space; creating space for 3,885 new jobs.
To reach not 33% but 100% of Palo Alto’s 2015-2023 RHNA VLI/LI target this way would require roughly
4.5 million square feet of new office space, and 18,000 new jobs.
Note these are “Supply Only” numbers; “Net-of-Demand” numbers for this much office space would suggest actual net losses in the hundreds of units of city VLI/LI housing availability, with corresponding displacement of hundreds or more lower-income residents. This conflict between RHNA performance and low-income displacement, in context of private commercial development as a funding tool for affordable housing, represents a structural problem with the RHNA process as currently measured.
Palo Alto Criteria
Net New
VLI/LI
Supply
(
units)
Economically
Feasible sf
Office per
V
LI/LI unit
New Office
Space
Needed (sf)
Implied New
Jobs
VLI/LI
Demand per
1,000 sf
O
ffice
Net New
VLI/LI
Demand
(
units)
Net-of-
Demand
VLI/LI Supply
(
units)
Additional VLI/LI units to reach
33% of Palo Alto RHNA Target 206 4,715 971,290 3, 885 0.65 629 (423) Additional VLI/LI units to reach
100% of Palo Alto RHNA Target 957 4,715 4,512,255 18,049 0.65 2,924 (1,967) b
Packet Pg. 258
Appendix 4 – MANAGING HOUSING SUPPLY AND DEMAND
After the end of the 2008 Recession, the entire Valley added jobs much faster than housing. In 2014, facing record-high and still-escalating jobs-housing ratios, Palo Alto began what became a two-pronged effort to concurrently manage both Demand and Supply for city housing:
• Demand suppression: imposed nonresidential development caps in 2015 and 2018 (the latter a citizen ballot initiative). PHZ projects must be net-housing-positive. • Supply support: residential upzoning, including 2018’s “Housing Incentive Program,” residential upzoning of multi-unit and near-transit districts, an Affordable Housing Overlay, and 2019’s “PHZ” tool, which established a vehicle for the city to negotiate relaxed multi-unit design standards in exchange for higher BMR inclusion rates.
This dual-focus “Jobs-Housing First” policy has not been without controversy, including prompting one regional organization’s famous remark, “‘Jobs’ is not a four-letter word!”1 While supply-side results are still ambiguous, a pipeline of interesting projects has developed. And with the caveats that (1) correlation is not causation, and (2) ACS data is not perfect, there are some positive indicators: Palo Alto job growth appears to have stopped since 2016, while continuing to surge elsewhere in the region; and our jobs-housing ratio appears to have plateaued and may even be edging slightly downwards. Also encouragingly, the rate of appreciation of rental housing costs in the City appears to have slowed since 2015, despite continuing and in some cases accelerating in other job-rich parts of the Valley.
b
Packet Pg. 259
For these reasons we ask the Grand Jury not to simply dismiss this approach; but consider it, and monitor it, as the region evolves over the next several years. Balancing the demand and supply for housing has become a vexing problem for the entire region; multiple approaches should be on the table.
Source: ACS 5-yr data tables B08601, DP05; US Census H1
1. https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/01/10/i-want-to-see-the-valley-step-up-gov-newsom- pressures-companies-to-help-build-housing/
b
Packet Pg. 260