HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 324-10TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PLANNING
AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT
DATE: JULY 26,2010 CMR: 324:10
REPORT TYPE: ACTION
SUBJECT: Approval of Stakeholder Task Force and Direction to the City Manager to
Appoint Task Force Members for Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On July 12, 2010, the Council initiated a Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study to evaluation land use,
transportation, and urban design elements of the corridor. This agenda item outlines the
composition of a proposed stakeholder Task Force for the Rail Corridor Study, to include 15
members representing a variety of interests (residents, businesses, civic organizations, youth,
etc.). The Task Force would provide input to the study and would solicit information from the
broader community, as well as helping design processes to insure maximum community
engagement throughout the study. The Task Force meetings will be open to the public and public
notice will be provided to an extensive group of stakeholders and interested parties. The Task
Force will regularly report to the Council, Planning and Transportation Commission (P&TC),
and the Council's High Speed Rail Committee, and its recommendations will be reviewed by the
P&TC prior to recommendation to Council. The next steps in the process will be to solicit
proposals from planning and urban design consultants and to initiate formation of the Task
Force.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Approve the composition of the Task Force for the Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study; and
2. Direct the City Manager to appoint the melnbers of the Task Force.
BACKGROUND
On July 12, 2010, the City Council authorized staff to proceed with a scope of work and Request
for Proposal for consulting services to assist with preparation of a Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study.
Funding for the study was approved by the Council on June 28, contingent on the July 12
authorization for the study. The Council directed, however, that approval of the proposed
stakeholder Task Force be deferred pending further review of the Task Force composition, added
opportunity for public input, and more information about the process of Task Force review
relative to the Planning and Transportation Commission, the Council's High Speed Rail
CMR: 324:10 Page 1 of 4
Commission, and the City Council. The City Manager's Report for the July 12, 2010 meeting is
included as Attachment B.
DISCUSSION
The intent of the proposed Rail Corridor Study is to generate a community vision for land use,
transportation, and urban design opportunities along the Caltrain corridor. The study may address
some High Speed Rail (HSR) issues in a timely manner, but is not limited to the HSR effort and
would provide a vision and context for other rail improvements (even without HSR) and the
City's land use, transportation and urban design preferences relative to those actions. The study
area is not specifically defined at this time, but an initial boundary is proposed to include Alma
Street and properties within about 500 feet to the east, El Camino Real on the west, and the city
boundaries of Menlo Park and Mountain View to the north and south (Attachment A). The
boundary is likely to be amended as impact and opportunity areas are more clearly defined.
Stakeholder Task Force
The scope of work for the study proposes a Rail Corridor Task Force to serve as a primary
conduit for input on and information flow regarding the Study to and from key stakeholders and
the larger con1munity. Staff proposes that the Task Force be established and operate as follows:
a) The Task Force would be appointed by the City Manager and would comprise fifteen
(15) members, representing broad stakeholder and community interests, including:
adjacent or affected neighborhoods (3); business interests in downtown, California
Avenue, and elsewhere (3); the Palo Alto Unified School District (1); the Silicon Valley
Board of Realtors (1); an affordable housing developer (1); a social services provider
(e.g., hmVision, Avenidas, Downtown Streets Team) (1); the Palo Alto Youth Council
(1); environmental organizations (e.g., Sierra Club, Acterra) (1); Santa Clara Valley AIA
(American Institute of Architects) (1); Stanford University (1); and a Palo Alto Caltrain
rider (1).
b) Representatives from interested City boards and commissions (e.g., Planning and
Transportation Commission, Architectural Review Board, Historic Resources Board,
Bicycle Advisory Committee, Citizen Traffic Safety Committee, Parks and Recreation
Commission) would be invited to appoint liaisons to the Task Force to attend and observe
meetings and report back to their respective board or commission.
c) The Task Force should serve as a conduit to and from other stakeholders and should work
with staff to set up networks and techniques at the outset of the process to assure
engagement of the broader community throughout the study. An initial effort of the Task
Force will be to develop a plan for outreach to assure extensive input from all interested
and affected segments of the community.
d) Meetings of the Task Force would be subject to all Brown Act committee requiren1ents.
Meetings would be open to the public and public notice would be provided as prescribed
by the Brown Act, at a minimum (staff anticipates considerably more extensive notice
would be provided to an extensive list of stakeholders and interested individuals).
e) Individuals on the task force would not, however, be subject to filing the Form 700
disclosure statements of conflicts of interest, since any recommendations will be subject
to substantive intervening review by the Planning and Transportation Commission
(P&TC), prior to PTC recommendations to Council.
CMR: 324:10 Page 2 of 4
f) The Task Force members will take votes to recommend components of the study to the
Planning and Transportation Commission, which will then report its recommendations to
the City Council.
g) Quarterly status reports of the study progress will be provided by staff to the Council,
Planning and Transportation Commission, and the Council's HSR Committee. Reports
from the Planning and Transportation Commission will be provided for information to
the HSR Committee prior to Council review. Where timely, reports and
recommendations of the Task Force that are relevant and timely to address High Speed
Rail issues will also be forwarded to the Council's HSR Committee.
Revisions Since July 12
Notice of staffs suggested conlmittee composition was e-mailed on July 15, 2010 to the Palo
Alto Neighborhoods list-serve, the Chamber of Commerce, and a total of approximately 50
organizations and individuals who might be considered stakeholders. Staff notes that the
proposed composition of the Task Force has been altered somewhat since the July 12 meeting,
based on comments from Council and the community in the interim, and to bring the participants
up to. the full complement of 15 members. In particular, representation from Californians for
Responsible Rail Design (CARRD) has been omitted, at the request of that organization, which
prefers to remain independent participants of the process. Also, the CalTrain Joint Powers Board
representative has been deleted, as staff believes that agency could better serve as a resource for
the study. Staff has added representatives that appear likely to have a direct stake in the corridor
planning effort, including one each from: students (Youth Council), social services providers
(e.g., InnVision, Avenidas), realtors (Silicon Valley Board of Realtors), architects/designers
(Santa Clara Valley AlA), and a Palo Alto Caltrain rider.
There were several other interested parties considered, but staff believed that all of those would
be represented in some way under the proposal. This composition does not exclude other groups
or individuals from participation in the meetings, and staff expects that the first product of the
Task Force will be a community engagement plan to effectively involve as many interested
parties as possible.
Task Force Review Process
Staff also has proposed a revised process for reVIew of Task Force study reports and
recommendations. In particular, the process would typically result in Task Force
recommendations to the P&TC, which then recommends to the City Council. The process would
not typically include review and recomnlendation by the City's HSR Committee, since they are
focused only on the HSR subject. However, provision is included to report quarterly to that
group and to provide status reports or recommendations that relate closely to HSR and are timely
for HSR deliberations. Quarterly status reports to the P&TC and Council are also specified.
Staff believes that the Task Force approach to public outreach is critical to producing a study
within the prescribed budget and timeframe, and to ensure meaningful public input and
engagement. The composition may be altered somewhat, but staff believes that Task Force
nlembership should be limited to 15 to result in successful management of the meetings and
process.
CMR: 324:10 30f4
NEXT STEPS
Staff is in the process of preparing a Request for Proposal, incorporating and expanding the
scope of work, to disseminate to interested consultants. Staff is also proceeding with collecting
and summarizing relevant existing documents and studies. Upon Council direction, staff will
reach out to the various designated stakeholders to set up the Task Force. The Task Force could
proceed with its organization and outreach kickoff prior to the consultant(s) beginning work.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The proposed Study is intended to review the existing policies of the City and to propose
revisions or additions for consideration. At this time, there is no action proposed contrary to
existing policies.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Study proposal and scope of work do not constitute a project requiring environmental review
under the California Environmental Quality Act. At this time, staff anticipates that
environmental review for the Rail Corridor Study will be completed as part of the
Comprehensive Plan.
PREPARED BY:
Director of Planning and Comnlunity Environment
APPROVED BY:
. ~~ vQ~"v~
~ STEVE EMSLIE
Deputy City Manager
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL:
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A:
Attachment B:
Preliminary Map of Study Area Boundary
CMR 307:10, Ju, 2010 Rail Corridor Study
COURTESY COPIES
Californians Advovating for Responsible Rail Design
Planning and Transportation Commission
CMR: xxx::10 Page 4 of 4
~
()
"i' a -:;
" ;;:
o
~--i §~
~§
\
;0 ;00
~, 0> ~ a = '< 0 c....
0> ~ ~ 0. w' a: 0.
Q n:
C/) 0' C :::l
'",-0. ~
'-'< r "lJ 3' ~ fl
~= ~r s' 0> -< -" OJ
0
C
:::l 0. 0> -<
~~\\~l\~-~J
..... ,
'-
-\
r-(I)
·co (I)
:::::s Q.
ATTACHMENT A
o
'/";'/ '<,
/ :~~ \)-
/ \--~ . ..
-,
!
/,
1,,-\---
0 3 t~"--------.p----.. --~~a.,,,,--------"------a."--------------"--------------I Ji g'~
~~ H !l g-
g
o~ ~i
Q~ ..z ~.
9.~
~:
Palo Alto
Rail Corridor Study:
Preliminary Boundary
v.071910
;;:~I" ...................................................................................................... ~ ........................ .. o~
ATTACHMENT B
TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PLANNING
AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT
DATE: JULY 12, 2010 CMR: 307:10
REPORT TYPE: ACTION
SUBJECT: Recommendation of High Speed Rail Committee for Council Review of and
Direction Regarding Draft Scope of Work for Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study
and Creation of a Rail Corridor Task Force
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This proposal outlines a scope of work, timeline and budget to prepare a Palo Alto Rail Corridor
Study. The intent of the proposed Rail Corridor Study is to generate a community vision for land
use, transportation, and urban design opportunities along the Caltrain corridor, particularly in
response to improvements to fixed rail services along the tracks through Palo Alto. The proposal
anticipates that a Task Force representing 9-15 key stakeholders would be appointed by staff to
provide input to the study and to solicit information from the broader comn1unity. Committee
members would also serve as conduits for sharing information back to the community, formally
and informally. The study is proposed in three phases and the estimated timeframe for
completion is 13-16 months. The approximate cost of $200,000 would include about $100,000 in
the current fiscal year (already approved by Council) and $100,000 in the 2011-2012 fiscal year.
The next steps in the process would be to solicit proposals from planning and urban design
consultants and to initiate formation of the Task Force.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Review and comment on the Draft scope of work for a Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study; and
2. Direct staff to proceed with the study, including issuance of a Request for Proposals for
consultant services.
BACKGROUND
On June 23, 2010, the City Council conceptually approved the City'S comments to the California
High Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) regarding the Authority's Preliminary Alternatives
Analysis (AA) Report, and directed staff to work with the Mayor, Chair of the High Speed Rail
(HSR) Committee, and accept other Council input to finalize the comments. The letter was sent
to the CHSRA on June 29,2010. The Council and the High Speed Rail (HSR) Committee have
also discussed the need for a rail corridor study to address the City'S vision for this corridor, in
conjunction with or apart fron1 High Speed Rail and coordinated with the City's Comprehensive
CMR: 307:10 Page 1 of 4
Plan update. On June 28, the Council approved a budget with funds designated to support a Palo
Alto Rail Corridor Study for the fiscal year 2011. The funding was approved contingent upon
subsequent Council direction to proceed with the study at the July 12 meeting.
On July 1, 2010, the Council's High Speed Rail Committee voted 3-1 (Chair Klein dissenting) to
recomn1end to the full Council that the study proceed as outlined in the following scope of work.
Most of the Committee discussion dealt with the composition and responsibilities of the
community task force proposed to provide input for the Study (see Discussion below).
DISCUSSION
The intent of the proposed Rail Corridor Study is to generate a community vision for land use,
transportation, and urban design opportunities along the Caltrain corridor, particularly in
response to in1provements to fixed rail services along the tracks through Palo Alto. The study
may address some High Speed Rail (HSR) issues in a timely manner, but is not limited to the
HSR effort and would provide a vision and context for other rail improvements (even without
HSR) and the City's land use, transportation and urban design response to those actions. The
study area is not specifically defined at this time, but should begin with at least a boundary of
Alma Street on the east and EI Camino Real on the west, with the city boundaries of Menlo Park
and Mountain View to the north and south (Attachment B), to be expanded as impact and
opportunity areas are more clearly defined. A draft scope of work (Attachment A) for a Palo Alto
Rail Corridor Study, with time line and budget estimates, is included for Council review and is
discussed below:
a. Phased Approach: The scope of work outlines three primary phases of study over a 13-16
n10nth time frame:
o Phase I (4-6 months) would outline the preliminary "Context and Vision" for the
corridor, including' updated goals and policies and definition of key land use and
transportation parameters that will require further analysis and review.
o Phase II ( 6 months) would include the "Analysis" of land use, transportation, and
urban design components of potential rail and development scenarios, resulting in
two or three alten1atives and urban design considerations.
o Phase III (3-4 months) would integrate a preferred approach into a "Plan and
Implementation" to become a part of the Comprehensive Plan, including new or
modified goals, policies, and programs, implementation measures, mitigation, and
financing measures.
The phased approach is not entirely linear, however, as there are certain to be overlapping
components of the various phases, and staff will attempt to time the deliverables to
provide information that is timely to current reviews, such as the HSR effort.
b. Timeline: The scope anticipates a 13-16 month timeline for staff and consultant work
efforts. There is also likely to be about a 6-8 week lead time to bring a consultant aboard,
though staff could begin its work immediately.
c. Budget and Staff Resources: Staff would devote at least 0.5 FTE (half-time) of one
Planner or Senior Planner position to coordinate this effort and conduct the staff synthesis
.CMR: 307:10 Page 2 of 4
of existing and past planning efforts and analysis of Comprehensive Plan goals and
policies. Consultant services will be required for planning and urban design,
transportation, and economic analysis support. Estimated costs for consultant services are
estimated at $200,000 over the 16-month period, about 75% of which would be for
planning and urban design services. About half of this amount has been approved by
Council for the 2010-2011 fiscal year, and the remaining $100,000 would be required in
the following fiscal year to complete the study and plan by late 2011.
d. Public Outreach: The scope of work proposes a Rail Corridor Study Task Force to serve
as the primary conduit for input on and information flow regarding the Study to and from
key stakeholders and the larger community. Staff proposes that the Task Force be set up
and operate as follows:
o The Task Force would be appointed by the City Manager and would comprise 9-15
member~, representing broad stakeholder and community interests, including but not
limited to: adjacent or affected neighborhoods (3); business interests in downtown,
California Avenue, and elsewhere (3); Californians Advocating for Responsible Rail
Design (CARRD) (1); the Palo Alto Unified School District (1); an affordable
housing developer (1); an environmental representative (1); Stanford University (1);
and the Caltrain Joint Powers Board (1).
o Representatives from relevant City boards and commissions (e.g., Planning and
Transportation Commission, Architectural Review Board, Historic Resources Board,
Bicycle Advisory Committee, Citizen Traffic Safety Committee, Parks and
Recreation Commission) would be invited to appoint liaisons to the Task Force to
attend and observe meetings.
o The Task Force should serve as a conduit to and from other stakeholders and should
work with staff to set up networks and techniques at the outset of the process to
assure engagement of the broader community throughout the study.
o The Task Force will be a Brown Act committee, all meetings would be open to the
public and· notice would be provided to an extensive list of stakeholders and
interested individuals.
o The Task Force members will take votes to recommend components of the study to
the Planning and Transportation Commission and to the Council's HSR Committee.
Those two groups will then make recommendations to the City CounciL
Comn1unity outreach would also include community workshops, web-based interactive
information sharing and input, and periodic updates to the Plam1ing and Transportation
Commission and City CounciL Public hearings before both of those bodies will be
required prior to action on any of the Plan components. Staff believes that this approach
to public outreach is critical to producing a study within the prescribed budget and
timeframe.
The Council has previously voted to conduct a study of the key economic impacts and
opportunities of the High Speed Rail alternatives, rather than incorporate the analysis into the
Rail Corridor Study. This will allow for more timely input on these economic components to be
CMR: 307:10 Page 3 of4
con1pleted within the next 3-4 months. Approximately $40,000 of the funding approved by the
Council on June 28 is intended for the economic analysis (about $100,000 is then available for
the Rail Corridor Study in this fiscal year). Staff from Planning and the Manager's office will
meet later this week to outline the process for moving forward on the economic study, and will
present that outline and schedule to the HSR Committee and Council at upcoming meetings.
NEXT STEPS
Upon direction from the Council, staff will prepare a Request for Proposal, incorporating and
expanding the scope of work, to disseminate to interested consultants. Staff will also proceed
immediately with collecting and summarizing relevant existing documents and studies and
setting up the Task Force. The Task Force could proceed with its organization and outreach
kickoff prior to the consultant( s) beginning work.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The proposed Study is intended to review the existing policies of the C~ty and to propose
revisions or additions for consideration. At this time, there is no action proposed contrary to
existing policies.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Study proposal and scope of work do not constitute a project requiring environmental review
under the California Environmental Quality Act. At this time, staff anticipates that
environmental review for the rail corridor study will be completed as part of the Comprehensive
Plan.
PREPARED BY:
CURTIS WILLIAMS
Director of Planning and Community Environment
APPROVED BY: ~M~~+
Deputy City Manag er
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL:
ATTACHMENTS
A. Draft Scope of Work for Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study
CMR: 307:10 Page 4 of4
City of Palo Alto
Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study
Draft Scope of Work
July 12, 2010
ATTACHMENT A
A. Rail Corridor Study Intent and Definition: The Rail Corridor Study is intended to
generate a community vision for land use, transportation, and urban design
opportunities along the corridor, particularly in response to improvements to fixed
rail services along the Caltrain tracks through Palo Alto. Those improvenlents
may include any or all of the following: Caltrain upgrades, such as electrification
and/or grade separations, and/or High Speed Rail service. The "corridor" would
. cover, at a minimum, the Caltrain tracks from the Menlo Park boundary on the
north to the Mountain View city limit on the south, Alma Street parallel to the
tracks, and sufficient adjacent land to encompass those areas most directly affected
by potential land use, transportation, and urban design changes. The study would
then be translated into a Plan and implementation measures, and would be
incorporated, at least by into the City'S Comprehensive Plan.
B. Phase I: Context and Vision
1. Intent: Articulation of community values, character, vision
2. Contextlbackground: Comprehensive Plan, HSR Alternatives Analysis,
technical/operational (HSR, Caltrain) analyses, Revised Program EIR (Central
Valley to Bay Area), Palo Alto Intermodal Transit Center plamling
3. Work Tasks:
a. Define key land use paralneters and issues: e.g., redevelopment and/or
intensification opportunities, proximity to residential and transitions from
residential; preservation of community character/historic resources
b. Define key transportation paranleters and issues: grade separations, Alma
Street design, Palo Alto High Speed Rail station, pedestrian and bicycle
linkages and opportunities
4. Outreach: Stakeholder/public task force; community meeting; web-based
interactive community involvement; and progress meetings and public
hearings with the PTC and Council; other outreach methods to be identified
5. Deliverables: Updated goals, policies and vision statement(s); identification of
issues and opportunities for detailed analysis
6. Resources: Comp Plan planner (0.5 FTE); planning/urban design consultant
($50,000)
7. Schedule: 4-6 months (timed to provide input prior to release ofHSR DEIR)
Draft Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study: July 12,2010
Page 2
C. Phase II: Analysis
1. Intent: Analysis and development of land use, transportation and urban design
alternatives reflecting vision, goals and policies for corridor
2. Context: Phase I products and background, Draft EIR for San Jose-San
Francisco HSR (if available)
3. Work Tasks:
a. Evaluate land use constraints and opportunities, such as redevelopment/mixed
use along corridor (including Alma), open space enhancements, LEED-ND
consistency, housing sites, perfonning arts facilities; and define implications
for schools and parks, business districts, PTOD areas, potential right-of-way
needs (for rail or for grade separations)
b. Evaluate transportation constraints and opportunities, such as grade
separations, upgrading Alma Street, facilitating pedestrianlbike modes and new
linkages; and define key impacts on existing road networks, transit,
bicycle/pedestrian travel; and potential right-of-way needs (for rail or grade
separations)
c. Evaluate urban design constraints and opportunities, such as integration of
transportation network (auto, transit, bike, ped) with land uses, including
mixed use and open/public spaces; historic resource compatibility; public art;
and appropriate transitions from neighborhoods; as well as design of
transportation infrastructure (rail facilities, grade separations, bike/ped
facilities); and impediments to cohesive design (at grade/elevated tracks, grade
separations, etc.)
4. Outreach: Stakeholder/public task force; community workshops; web-based
interactive community involvement; progress meetings and public hearings
with PTC and Council; other outreach methods to be identified
5. Deliverables: Up to 3 alternative land use/transportation scenarios, preliminary
traffic and visual impact analyses, and identification of draft urban design
principles and opportunities
6. Resources: Compo Plan planner (0.5 FTE); planning/urban design consultant
($50,000); transportation/engineering consultant ($25,000)
7. Schedule: 6 months
Draft Palo Alto Rail Corridor Study: July 12, 2010
Page 3
D. Phase III: Plan and Implementation
1. Intent: Prepare plan as guidance for corridor development and for integration
into Comprehensive Plan; and implementation measures and schedule
2. Context: Phase I and Phase II products and background; Comprehensive Plan
update; future High Speed Rail studies or decisions
3. Work Tasks:
a. Identify preferred land use/transportation/urban design strategy(ies)
b. Refine vision/goals/policies from Phase I
c. Identify key environmental considerations/mitigation
d. Identify key costs implications/considerations
e. Identify implementation and funding approach (CIP, bonds, tax increment
financing, public/private partnerships, TDR, codes)
4. Outreach: Stakeholder/public task force, community workshops, web-based
interactive community involvement, and public meetings and hearings with
PTC and Council; other outreach methods to be identified
5. Deliverables: Draft Rail Corridor Plan and implementation components for
public review; Comprehensive Plan amendments as necessary
6. Resources: Comp Plan planner (0.5 FTE); planning/urban design consultant
($50,000); transportation/engineering consultant ($25,000); economic
consultant ($15,000)
7. Schedule: 3-4 months (not including EIR)
Total Time and Cost
Phase I
Phase II
Phase III
Totals
Additional Assun1ptions:
Time
4-6 months
6 months
3-4 months
13-16 months
Cost (excluding staff costs)
$ 50,000
$ 75,000
$ 90,000
$200,000
1. Most public outreach embodied in proposed Task Force (9-15 members); appointed by
staff to represent broad cross-section of stakeholders (adjacent/nearby homeowners,
businesses, CAARD, P AUSD, housing, environmental, Stanford, Caltrain JPB, etc.);
all meetings open to the public and invitees will include an extensive list of
stakeholders
2. Environmental review builds on HSR or Con1p Plan EIR or is an additional task
3. No extensive design study of an HSR station