Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-05-11 City Council (10)City Mana Yr,°sf10 TO:HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS DATE:MAY 11, 1998 CMR:226:98 SUBJECT:STATUS REPORT ON FLOOD PROTECTION ACTIVITIES FOR SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK AND TRANSMITTAL OF THE COORDINATED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND PLANNING (CRMP) REPORT ON FLOOD AND EROSION CONTROL ALTERNATIVES REPORT INBRIEF This report transmits the Reconnaissance Investigation Report of San Francisquito Creek prepared by the Coordinated Resource Management and Planning (CRMP) Flood and Erosion Control Task Force. The report briefly describes various project alternatives and presents updated information on their construction feasibility, potential impacts, and preliminary costs. Although the report does not contain a sufficient level of detail to allow selection of a preferred alternative at this time, staff recommends that Council endorse the report as a basis for further study of flood and erosion control alternatives for San Francisquito Creek. This report also describes the ongoing series of meetings between the City Manager and officials from other jurisdictions¯in the San Francisquito Creek watershed to discuss the formation of a joint powers authority (JPA) to oversee development and implementation of flood and erosion control measures for the creek.- A JPA would function as a vehicle to enable policy makers from various agencies to jointly discuss and make decisions on future creek policies and improvements. Staff seeks Council direction to continue the cooperative process and pursue the formation of a J-PA. In order to promote continued progress in addressing flood and erosion hazards on San Francisquito Creek, this report also recommends submittal of a letter to the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) reaffirming Palo Alto’s support for further San Francisquito Creek engineering and environmental studies, and requesting that the SCVWD take a lead agency role in preparation of such studies. CMR:226:98 Page 1 of 6 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council: 1.Endorse the Reconnaissance Invest~ation Report of San Francisquito Creek prepared through the Coordinated Resource Management and Planning (CRMP) process as the basis for further study of flood and erosion control ¯ alternatives for San Francisquito Creek. Direct the City Manager to continue the ongoing cooperative efforts with other San Francisquito Creek stakeholders to form a joint powers authority to oversee development and implementation of flood and erosion control measures for the creek. o Direct the City Manager to submit the attached letter to the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) reaffirming Palo Alto’s support for the study of flood and erosion control options for San Francisquito Creek, and requesting that the SCVWD take a lead agency role in preparation of such a study. BACKGROUND On November 14, 1994, Council endorsed staff’s participation in the ongoing CRMP process for San Francisquito Creek (CMR:506:94). The purpose of the CRMP process is to promote the enhancement and health of the San Francisquito Creek watershed, by stimulating dialogue amongst the interested parties and identifying major problems, planning objectives, and future actions. On April 17, 1995, Council directed staff to submit a letter to the SCVWD endorsing a flood and erosion control study of San Francisquito Creek (CMR: 166:95)(Attachment A). The SCVWD agreed to prepare a reconnaissance level study in conjunction with the CRMP’s Flood and Erosion Control Task Force, which has overseen the preparation and review ofthestudy. Staffhas taken an active role in the Task Force and ¯ has provided input to the study over the past several years. On March 30, 1998, the CRMP Steering Committee released the Reconnaissance Investigation Report of San Francisquito Creek to the public. DISCUSSION Reconnaissance Investigation Report of San Francisquito Creek The Reconnaissance Investigation Report of San Francisquito Creek is a compilation of historical flood and erosion control proposals for San Francisquito Creek (Attachment 2). The report briefly describes various flood control alternatives and presents updated information on their construction feasibility, potential impacts, and preliminary costs. The report presents the proposals in an objective fashion and does not contain a recommended course of action. CMR:226:98 Page 2 of 6 The reconnaissance report provides an overview of the San Francisquito Creek flood hazard, including a summary of past flood events, description of the one percent flood~, estimates of potential flood damages, and discussion of specific flood and erosion problem areas. The bulk of the report describes potential flood and erosion control alternatives that have been considered in the past. The alternatives generally fall into one of three categories: 1) upstream reservoir, 2) channel diversions, or 3) instreamimprovements. Preliminary project cost estimates vary from approximately $100 million up to $1.5 billion. Some of the alternatives would provide full protection from a one percent flood, while others provide a lower level of protection. It is likely that any future flood and erosion control project will consist of a combination of the individual alternatives discussed in the report. Although the reconnaissance report does not contain a sufficient level of detail to allow selection of a preferred alternative, CRMP has prepared it in order to provide policy makers and the public with a historical perspective that will facilitate the next steps in discussing flood and erosion control options. The report was developed based upon input from a wide variety of agencies, groups, and individuals with varied interests in San Francisquito Creek. Staff recommends that Council endorse the Reconnaissance Investigation Report of San Franeisquito Creek as the basis for future detailed studies of flood and erosion control options for San Francisquito Creek. Cooperative Efforts to Address San Francisquito Creek Flood and Erosion Control Following the February 2-3, 1998 flood and the CRMP’s release of the Reconnaissance. Investigation Report of San Francisquito Creek, high-level representatives from local municipalities and agencies convened the San Francisquito Creek Coordinating Committee. Committee representatives include the city managers or senior staff members from Palo Alto, Menlo Park, East Palo Alto, Portola Valley, and Woodside; management staff from the .SCVWD, San Mateo County Flood Control District, and Stanford University; and CRMP representatives. The City Manager and the Director of Public Works represent Palo Alto on the Committee. The Committee has been meeting on a biweekly basis to share information regarding the February 2-3 flood and subsequent flood recovery, and to look for opportunities to address creek-related issues cooperatively. One of the major obstacles to addressing the flooding and erosion hazards on San Francisquito Creek has been the fragmented jurisdictional boundaries and responsibilities related to the creek. The lack of a single agency with authority throughout the San Francisquito Creek watershed or a formal inter-agency agreement coordinating multiple 1The one percent flood has a one percent chance of occurring in any given year. It is sometimes referred to as the 100-year flood, because it is the flood that would be equaled or exceeded on an average of one time every one hundred years, measured over a long time period. CMR:226:98 Page 3 of 6 agencies has resulted in relative inaction in solving major challenges posed by the creek. Historically, local agencies and volunteer groups have worked together to remove fallen trees and branches, trash, and other debris from the creek on a periodic basis. The CRMP process has brought together many of the stakeholders with an interest in San Francisquito Creek to discuss joint objectives and policies and has greatly improved the communication between the various parties, but it lacks the major funding source; authority, and formal institutional agreements required to tackle large-scale flooding and erosion control problems. The San Francisquito Creek Coordinating Corvanittee has been discussing the possibility of forming a joint powers authority (JPA) to oversee development and implementation of flood and erosion control measures for the creek. A JPA would function as a vehicle to enable policy makers from various jurisdictions to jointly discuss and make decisions on future creek policies and improvements. The city attorneys from Palo Alto, Menlo Park, and Portola Valley are drafting potential frameworks for a JPA agreement for review by the Committee. The San Francisquito Creek Coordinating Committee has focused on developing a list of short-term projects that could be implemented cooperatively by the participating agencies. Examples of potential projects include tree and vegetation removal, excess sediment removal, creekside resident education, remote creek flow monitoring, and erosion repair. The Committee is also considering the need for several studies that could be performed in preparation for a full-scale Planning Study/Environmental Impact Report for San Francisquito Creek flood control, such as a geomorphology study to assess creek bank stability and identify stable creek slopes/alignment, updated hydrology (rainfall analysis), updated survey information, and flora/fauna assessments. The Committee has discussed the . possibility of starting some of these preliminary studies with up-front funding from one or more of the participating agencies while the larger, long-term funding and scoping issues are being discussed and finalized. The Committee is also working with CRMP representatives to plan and schedule community meetings to present the Reconnaissance Investigation Report of San Franeisquito Creek and to receive comments and answer questions from the public. Staff believes that cooperation between the various agencies within th6 San Francisquito Creek watershed is an essential step towards resolving ihe flood and erosion control problems associated with the creek. Consequently, staff seeks Council support for continuing the ongoing efforts to identify and implement cooperative projects and to explore the feasibility of forming a JPA to oversee the projects. Role of SCVWD The Reconnaissance Investigation Report of San Francisquito Creek is the first step towards implementation of Council’s established policy of support for the study of flood and erosion control options for San Francisquito Creek. A series of more detailed engineering studies and environmental assessments will be required in order to give policy makers and the public CMR:226:98 Page 4 of 6 adequate information to select a preferred alternative. Staff believes that the SCVWD is the best-suited agency amongst the participants in the San Francisquito Creek Coordinating Committee to perform these future studies. Therefore, staff seeks approval to submit the attached letter to the General Manager of the SCVWD reaffirming Palo Alto’s support for the study of flood and erosion control options for San Francisquito Creek, and requesting that the SCVWD take a lead agency role in conducting the studies (Attachment 3). RESOURCE IMPACT The need for additional staffing in order to continue participation in the San Francisquito Creek Coordinating Committee is not anticipated at this time. Future funding requirements for engineering and environmental studies are unknown at this time. Any funding commitments related to the proposed joint powers authority agreement will be. referred to Council at the time the agreement is submitted for approval. POLICY IMPLICATIONS This report is consistent with the previously established Council policy in support of the study of flood and erosion control options for San Francisquit0 Creek. TIMELINE Staff will notify Council of the community meeting to present CRMP’s Reconnaissance lnvest~ation Report of San Francisquito Creek to the public. The meeting is tentatively scheduled for May 27, 1998. Staffwill return to Council for approval ofa JPA agreement after it has been reviewed by the San Francisquito Creek Coordinating Committee. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW There is no environmental assessment required in conjunction with this report. If the Santa Clara Valley Water District and/or the San Mateo County Flood Control District proceed with a planning study of flood anderosion control options for San Francisquito Creek, they will be responsible for preparation of an environmental assessment of each identified project alternative. ATTACHMENTS A - April 18, 1995 letter to Santa Clara Valley Water District B - Reconnaissance Investigation Report of San Francisquito Creek C - Proposed letter to Santa Clara Valley Water District reaffirming Palo Alto’s support for the study of flood and erosion control options for San Francisquito Creek CMR:226:98 Page 5 of 6 PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT HEAD: Joe Teresi, Senior Engineer GLENN S. ROBERTS Public Works CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: cc:Kay Whitlock, Santa Clara Valley Water District Walt Callahan, San Mateo County Flood Control District Jan Dolan, City of Menlo Park Jerry Groomes, City of East Palo Alto Alex Mclntyre, Town of Portola Valley Susan George, Town of Woodside Leonie Batkin, Stanford Management Company Pat Showalter, SanFrancisquito Creek CRMP coordinator Cathy Lehrberg, Crescent Park Neighborhood Association Kevin Fisher, Duveneck Neighborhood Association Raymond Hebert, St. ~Francis Neighborhood Association Warren Kallenbach, Community Center Neighbors Association John Paul Hanna CMR:226:98 Page 6 of 6 Cityt~,i Palo AI’EOATTACHN[ENT A Office of the City Ma~mger Mr. Stan Williams General Manager Santa Clara. Valley Water District 5750 Almaden Expwy. San Jose, CA 95118 April 18, 1995 Dear Mr. Williams: On behalf of the Palo Alto City Council, I am writing to endorse the San Francisquito Creek Coordinated Resource and Planning (CRMP) Steering Committee’s request for a joint flood and erosion control study of the creek by the District and the San Mateo County Public Works Department. In submitting this endorsement, I want to emphasize Council’s interest in pursuing solutions which do not damage the unspoiled character of the creek. As requested in the CRMP letter, your study should focus on the development of options that preserve .the creek in its natural state as much as possible, avoiding the use of concrete. In keeping with the ideals of the CRMP, future plans for San Francisquito Creek should take into account the needs and concerns of the various stakeholders, and it is therefore essential that the study be conducted with ample opportunities for public comment and participation. The City is committed to working with your staff, CRMP participants, and members of the public to develop environmentally sound options for alleviating flooding and erosion along San Francisquito Creek while preserving its aesthetics and habitat value. ,.I. look forward to a creative plan for the creek that will add to its status as a community asset. ~".mcerely,,[~) Manager JT/JT:ko Debbie Mytels, CRMP Steering Committee John Paul Hanna P.O.Box 10250 PaloAlto, CA 94303 415.329.2563 415. 328.3631 Fax ATTACHMENT C April 30, 1998 Mr. Stan Williams General Manager Santa Clara Valley Water District 5750 Almaden Expwy. San Jose, CA 95118 Dear Mr. Williams: ~ On behalf of the Palo Alto City Council, I am writing t0~reaffirm Palo Alto’s support for the continued study of flood and erosion control, options for San Francisquito Creek. The Reconnaissance Investigation~Report of San Francisquito Creek prepared by the-District:in conjunction:with the Coordinated Resource Management and Planning’s (CRMP) Flood and Erosion Control Task Force provides a good starting.point for future, disc~_si~ns-ofproject alternatives. It is evident, however, __that additional det~ileff£engineering analyses and environmental assessments will be required to e~ab!.~oiicy makers and the public to select a preferred~a!ternative..palo Alto endorses the ongoing cooperative efforts to proceed .with~:the next-steps in the project planning process. Palo Alto sharesthe District::t_.~6~tm_¢nt to the CRMP process and the recently convened’theS~ Francisqu~tgi~_Cr~)¢k Coordinating Committee as a vehicle for developingand~:]mPlementing~flood and erosion control solutions. This ~ooperative apprSaeh~ill ensure that the concerns of the various stakeholders are addressed and-that:futu~e~tudies will be conducted with ample opportunities for public comment arid;P~cipation. City staff concurs that collaboration between the:variousagencie~_W~i~n the San Francisquito Creek watershed is an essential step-towards:selecting a preferred project alternative. It is the City’s position, however;-that:!one of the agencies will need to assume a lead agency role in performin$:_thenecessary studies in order to ensure continued progress towards successful project implementation. Palo Alto believes that the District is the best- suited.agency to fill the lead agency role and hereby requests that you consider accepting this leadership role for future San-Francisquito Creek flood and erosion control studies. The City is committed to working with your staff, CRMP participants, and members of the public to develop environmentally sound options for alleviating Letter to Stan Williams April 30, 1998 Page 2 flooding and erosion along San Francisquito Creek while preserving its aesthetics and habitat value. I look forward to successfulimplementation of a project with widespread community support and lasting benefits. Sincerely, -~ JUNE FLEMING City Manager JF/JT:sm cc:Kay Whitlock, Santa Clara Valley Water District Walt Callahan, San Mate0:Coun~-~10od Control District Jan Dolan, City of Menlo Park- ~ Jerry Groomes, CityofEast Palo Alto ~ Alex Mclntyre, Town of Portola Valley Susan George, Town of Woodside Leonie Batkin, Stanford Management Company Pat Showalter; San Francisquito CreekCRMP coordinator Cathy Lehrberg, Creselent-~ark N~ghborhood Association Kevin Fisher, Duveneck Nei~bo-thood Association RaYmondHebert, St:~F~eis:Neighborhood Association Warren K~llenbach, C6mmunity Center Neighbgrs Association John Paul:Hanna