Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 192-09 CMR:192:09 Page 1 of 4 TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT:PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT DATE: MARCH 30, 2009 CMR: 192:09 REPORT TYPE: REPORT OF OFFICIALS SUBJECT: Approval of (a) Scoping Comments Letter for the San Francisco to San Jose High Speed Train Project Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement, (b) Memorandum of Understanding with Various Peninsula Cities in Order to Form the Peninsula Cities Consortium for Interaction with the California High Speed Rail Authority and (c) Comment Letter to Caltrain Joint Powers Board regarding the Memorandum of Understanding with California High Speed Rail Authority RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Approve or modify and approve, and authorize the Mayor to sign the attached letter to the California High Speed Rail Authority (Authority) outlining Palo Alto’s scoping comments for the San Francisco to San Jose High Speed Train Project Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS), and 2. Approve and authorize the Mayor to sign the attached Memorandum of Understanding to join the Peninsula Cities Consortium for interaction with the California High Speed Rail Authority, and 3. Approve and authorize Mayor to sign the attached letter to Caltrain Joint Powers Board with comments and objections to proposed Memorandum of Understanding with the California High Speed Rail Authority. BACKGROUND On March 2, 2009 the City Council reviewed a draft of the City’s scoping letter for the San Francisco to San Jose HST Project EIR/EIS, referred it and relevant transportation and land use policy issues, including the station issue, to the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC), and directed staff to return to Council prior to the April 6 scoping comment period deadline to review and finalize the City’s comment letter. BOARD/COMMISSION REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS On March 18, 2009 the PTC discussed the draft scoping comment letter (Attachment C, PTC staff report). The draft minutes of the PTC meeting are provided as Attachment F. CMR:192:09 Page 2 of 4 The PTC recommended that the City specifically request that the Authority use Palo Alto’s significance criteria for evaluating impacts within Palo Alto’s portion of the HST corridor and that the criteria and related documents, including the Tree Technical Manual, be forwarded to the Authority with the scoping comment letter. The PTC’s discussion focused on additional areas of comment to be included in the letter related to impacts on natural resources, utilities, housing and population, hazardous materials, noise, historic and cultural resources and infrastructure. In addition to comments on the scoping letter, one Commissioner indicated an interest in the City preparing and adopting a HST Policy. Other Commissioners voiced support for this position. Staff indicated in the report to the PTC that these matters will return to the PTC at a later date for full discussion. Some PTC comments went beyond the scope of this EIR/EIS, and have not been included in the letter. Such comments included reopening the Hwy 101 alignment as a HST route from San Jose to San Francisco, which was analyzed and rejected in the Central Valley to Bay Area Project Program EIR/EIS, and evaluating an extension of the Light Rail from Mountain View to Palo Alto. Other comments related to permutations of the elevated, depressed or at-grade design configurations were in such detail that they have been included in a more generic way in the comment letter. Approximately 10 members of the public addressed the PTC in person and approximately 3 members of the public submitted written comments to the PTC (see Attachment G). On March 18, 2009 the Historic Resources Board (HRB) held a study session to provide comments on historic resources for inclusion in the City’s letter to the CAHSR Authority regarding the proposed High-Speed Train System project. A summary of the HRB comments is provided as Attachment D. On March 19, 2009 the Architectural Review Board (ARB) discussed the HST project and draft scoping comment letter. The Board expressed support for the HST project with the full route from Los Angeles to San Francisco and with an alternative that would place the tracks below grade with air rights development above. A summary of their discussion is provided as Attachment E. The ARB voted to appoint a subcommittee of two ARB members to assist the City staff and community as needed with respect to urban design related to the project. Based on the input from these Boards and the PTC, staff has revised the scoping comment letter to include their issues and concerns. Staff requests that Council accept or modify the letter and authorize the Mayor to sign the approved letter. Peninsula Cities Consortium During the past two months, elected officials from Peninsula cities have been meeting weekly to organize a coalition of agencies, the “Peninsula Cities Consortium” (Consortium), to work collectively to represent the shared interests and mutual concerns to the Authority. On March 2nd, Council authorized the Mayor to (1) sign a letter specifically requesting that the Authority work with the cities to address urban design alternatives to be addressed in the EIR/EIS and to have the opportunity for the consortium to review the scoping report before it is finalized by the Authority (see Attachment B of March 18 PTC report) and (2) appoint a three person Council High Speed Rail Subcommittee to work with staff and represent the Council in meetings of the Consortium, with the Subcommittee reporting back to Council at regular intervals. Mayor CMR:192:09 Page 3 of 4 Drekmeier subsequently appointed Council Members Kishimoto, Barton, and Burt to the committee. The City Attorney has been working with the ad hoc Peninsula Cities group to develop a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that would formalize the Consortium. The final draft has been reviewed by the ad hoc group and is now being submitted to each agency’s Council for approval. The Consortium would be created when five cities sign the MOU. Staff recommends that Council authorize the Mayor to sign the attached MOU (Attachment B). Caltrain JPB/CAHSR Authority Memorandum of Understanding On April 2, 2009 the Caltrain JPB is scheduled to approve an agreement to establish the initial organization framework for the planning, design and construction of the HST improvements in the Caltrain Corridor. The Authority has already authorized the Executive Director to enter into the MOU with the JPB. The most recent draft MOU is provided as Attachment H. Staff has noted that the MOU incorporates specific design commitments for the corridor, prior to completion of the EIR/EIS and evaluation of alternatives. The MOU Section III D states that the “ultimate configuration of the Caltrain corridor will be a four-track, grade-separated high speed rail system, with mixed traffic from Caltrain commuter rail and the high speed train service capable of operation on all four tracks to enable Caltrain to achieve service levels of no less than eight trains per hour in each direction. In some places the corridor may consist of more than four tracks.” Staff has included in the City’s scoping comment letter that alternatives to a four track project be considered. Staff is further concerned that the inclusion of design parameters in the MOU has not undergone CEQA review. Staff is also concerned that the MOU provide clear language regarding Caltrain’s commitment to consultation with the community in evaluating design and operational alternatives. The attached draft letter to the Caltrain JPB, therefore requests that the MOU contain a strong commitment to public outreach prior to the development of alternatives. POLICY IMPLICATIONS Action related to the HST project is consistent with existing Council policy incorporated into the adopted Palo Alto Transportation Strategic Plan, which included support California High Speed Rail as a medium priority and stated City Council position in support of Measure 1A. The recommended action for Council to provide comments and approve the scoping letter for the EIR/EIS for the San Francisco to San Jose segment is consistent with Comprehensive Plan Policy T-7: Support plans for a quiet, fast rail system that encircles the Bay, and for intra-county and transbay transit systems that link Palo Alto to the rest of Santa Clara County and adjoining counties. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Neither approval of the scoping letter nor joining the Peninsula Cities Consortium are considered projects under CEQA; therefore no Palo Alto environmental review is needed for Council to provide comments on the proposed EIR/EIS for the San Francisco to San Jose segment of the CAHSR project or to approve either MOU. CMR:192:09 Page 4 of 4 PREPARED BY: GAYLE LIKENS Transportation Manager DEPARTMENT HEAD: ______________________________________ CURTIS WILLIAMS Interim Director of Planning and Community Environment CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: __________________________________ JAMES KEENE City Manager ATTACHMENTS A. Draft Scoping Comments letter to CAHSR B. Peninsula Cities Consortium Memorandum of Understanding C. Planning and Transportation Commission report dated March 18, 2009 D. Minutes of ARB March 19, 2009 comments on HST Project EIR scoping E. Minutes of HRB Study Session of March 18, 2009 on HST Project EIR scoping F. Draft Minutes of March 18, 2009 Planning and Transportation Commission meeting G. Correspondence H. Caltrain JPB/CAHSR Memorandum of Understanding I. Letter to Caltrain Joint Powers Board COURTESY COPIES Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce Planning and Transportation Commission Southgate Representative Palo Alto Neighborhoods