Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 1795City of Palo Alto (ID # 1795) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 6/6/2011 June 06, 2011 Page 1 of 3 (ID # 1795) Summary Title: Eshoo, Simitian, Gordon letter Title: Approval of Letter to Congresswoman Anna G. Eshoo, Senator Joe Simitian and Assembly Member Rich Gordon From:City Manager Lead Department: City Manager Recommendation Staff recommends the City Council authorize the Rail Committee to communicate with the Peninsula Cities Consortium (PCC) cities, the California High Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) and related interests as necessary, regarding the City’s support of Congresswoman Anna G. Eshoo/Senator Joe Simitian/Assembly Member Rich Gordon’s April 18th, 2011 joint statement on high speed rail (HSR). Executive Summary Congresswoman Eshoo, State Senator Simitian and State Assembly Member Gordon issued a joint press release in April concerning high speed rail. This press release identified key policy positions on high speed rail (HSR), (see chart summary included below). The policies include: abandoning project environmental impact report (EIR) planning for the larger high speed rail project planned for build-out by 2035, being responsive to local concerns, eliminating the 4-track HSR option, rejecting the aerial viaduct option entirely and asserting that the HSR system should remain on the existing Caltrain right-of-way. A summary of the Eshoo/Simitian/Gordon recommendations and the City of Palo Alto City Council recommended policy position. June 06, 2011 Page 2 of 3 (ID # 1795) Eshoo Simitian Palo Alto Gordon City Council Policy Position 4/18/2011 6/7/2011 Abandon EIR planning for larger project Yes Yes over 25-year time horizon to 2035 Be responsive to local concerns Yes Yes Eliminate 4-track option Yes Yes Reject Aerial Viaduct option entirely Yes Yes System should remain on Caltrain ROW Yes Yes Background and Discussion The California High Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) heard testimony at their meeting May 5th based in part on the Eshoo/Simitian/Gordon joint press release and additional testimony from Peninsula cities. The Authority then took action directing their staff to postpone further planning work for the San Francisco to San Jose corridor. The Authority took this action to gather more information on the position of Peninsula area cities concerning HSR. The City Council Rail Committee met May 26th and voted to endorse the policy positions in the Eshoo/Simitian/Gordon press release and asked staff to bring this item to the City Council for consideration and review. The City Council Rail Committee support reflects the alignment of the policy positions of the Eshoo/Simitian/Gordon press release with the City Council May 17, 2010 adopted Role and Guiding Principles of the High Speed Rail Committee (see attached principles). Attachments: ·Attachment A: Letter June 7, 2011 Eshoo, Simitian, Gordon (DOC) ·Attachment B: Eshoo Simitian Gordon Statement (PDF) ·Attachment C: Guiding principles (PDF) Prepared By:Katie Whitley, Administrative Assistant June 06, 2011 Page 3 of 3 (ID # 1795) Department Head:James Keene, City Manager City Manager Approval: James Keene, City Manager June 7,2011 The Honorable Anna G. Eshoo, 14th Congressional District 698 Emerson Street Palo Alto, California 94301 The Honorable Joe Simitian, 11th Senate District 160 Town & Country Village Palo Alto, CA 94301 The Honorable Rich Gordon, 21st Assembly District 5050 El Camino Real, Suite 117 Los Altos, CA 94022 Subject:Congresswoman Anna G. Eshoo/Senator Joe Simitian/Assembly Member Rich Gordon April 18th 2011 Statement of High-Speed Rail and City of Palo Alto letter of support Dear Congresswoman Eshoo, Senator Simitian and Assembly Member Gordon: This letter is being sent to you to express Palo Alto’s support for your joint statement made on High Speed Rail (HSR). The issuance of this press release and the policy positions,taken in the release,are supported by the City. A summary of your recommendations and our support is provided below: Eshoo Simitian Palo Alto Gordon City Council Policy Position 4/18/2011 6/7/2011 Abandon EIR planning for larger project Yes Yes over 25-year time horizon to 2035 Be responsive to local concerns Yes Yes Eliminate 4-track option Yes Yes Reject Aerial Viaduct option entirely Yes Yes System should remain on Caltrain ROW Yes Yes Your joint statement and policy positions identified are in alignment with Palo Alto’s Role and Guiding Principles (attached for reference) of the High Speed Rail Committee adopted May 17, 2010. We sincerely appreciate your leadership on this very important issue. We look forward to continuing to work with you and your staff, other peninsula area cities and agencies, federal and state agencies and related parties for a project that is consistent with our adopted Guiding Principles. If this project is to be built it must be done right. Your joint statement is another step in helping to support this key principle. Sincerely yours, Sid Espinosa Mayor c:Palo Alto City Council Palo Alto City Manager Senator Dianne Feinstein Senator Barbara Boxer Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood Federal Railroad Administration Administrator Joe Szabo Governor Jerry Brown Senator Alan Lowenthal, Chair Senate Transportation Committee Assembly Member Bonnie Lowenthal, Chair Assembly Transportation Committee Supervisor Liz Kniss Curt Pringle, Chairperson, California High Speed Rail Authority Chief Executive Officer Roelof van Ark, California High Speed Rail Authority Peninsula Cities Consortium (PCC) Attachment ·Role and Guiding Principles of the High Speed Rail Committee of the Palo Alto City Council adopted May 17, 2010 Eshoo~ Simitian, Gordon Statement on High-Speed Rail I State Senator Joe Simitiari Page 1 of2 . ' ESHOO, SIMITIAN, GORDON STATEMENT ON HIGH-SPEED RAIL Since the passage of Proposition lA in 2008, each of us has expressed our support for "high-speed rail done right," by which we mean a genuinely statewide system that makes prudent use of hmlted pubhc funds and which IS responsive to legitimate concerns about the impact of high-speed rail on our cities, towns, neighborhoods and homes. To date, however, the California High Speed Rail Authority has failed to develop and describe such a system for the Peninsula and South Bay. For that reason, we have taken it upon ourselves today to set forth some basic parameters for what "high-speed rail done right" looks like in our region. We start with the premise that for the Authority to succeed in its statewide mission it must be sensitive and responsive to local concerns about local impacts. Moreover, it is undeniable that funding will be severely limited at both the state and national levels for the foreseeable future. Much of the projected cost for the San Jose to San Francisco leg of the project is driven by the fact that the Authority has, to date, proposed what is essentially a second rail system for the Peninsula and South Bay, unnecessarily duplicating existing usable infrastructure. Even if such a duplicative system could be constructed without adverse impact along the CalTrain corridor, and we do not believe it can, the cost of such duplication simply cannot be justified. Ifwe can barely find the funds to do high speed rail right, we most certainly cannot find the funds to do high speed rail wrong. Accordingly, we call upon the High-Speed Rail Authority and our local CalTrain Joint Powers Board to develop plans for a blended system that integrates high-speed rail with a 21st Century CalTrain. To that end: • We explicitly reject the notion of high-speed rail running from San Jose to San Francisco on an elevated structure or "viaduct"; and we call on the High-Speed Rail Authority to eliminate further consideration of an aerial option; • We fully expect that high-speed rail running from San Jose to San Francisco can and should remain within the existing CalTrain right of way; and, • Third and finally, consistent with a proje~ of this more limited scope, the Authority should abandon its preparation of an EIR (Environmental Impact Report) for a phased project of larger dimensions over a 25 year timeframe. Continuing to plan for a project of this scope in the face oflimited funding and growing community resistance is a fool's errand; and is particularly ill-3dvised when predicated on ridership projections that are less than credible. Within the existing right-of-way, at or below grade,a single blended system could allow high-speed rail arriving in San Jose to continue north in a seamless fashion as part of a 21st Century CalTrain (using some combination of electrification, positive train control, new rolling stock andlor other appropriate upgrades) while maintaining the currently projected speeds and travel time for high-speed rail. The net result of such a system would be a substantially upgraded co~uter service for Peninsula and South Bay residents capable of accommodating high-speed rail from San Jose to San Francisco. All of this is possible, but only if the High-Speed Rail Authority takes this opportunity to rethink its direction. Over the course of the past 18 months the Authority has come under considerable criticism from the California http://www.senatorsimitian.com/entry/eshoo _ simitian ~ordon _-statement_on _high-speed _r... 5112/2011 E~hoo, Simitian, Gordon Statement on High-Speed Rail I State Senator Joe Simitian Page 2 of2 Legislative Analyst's Office, the Bureau of State Audits, the California Office of the Inspector General, the Authority's own Peer Review Group and the Institute of Transportation Studies at the University of California at Berkeley. The Authority would do well to take these critiques to heart, and to make them the basis for a renewed and improved effort. Frankly, a great many of our constituents are convinced that the High-Speed Rail Authority has already wandered so far afield that it is too late for a successful course correction. We hope the Authority can prove otherwise.· An essential first step is a rethinking Of the Authority's plans for the Peninsula and South Bay. A commitment to a project which eschews an aerial viaduct, stays within the existing right-of-way, sets aside any notion of a phased project expansion at a later date, and incorporates the necessary upgrades for CalTrain -which would produce a truly blended system along the CalTrain corridor-is the essential next step. http://www.senatorsimitian.com/entry/eshoo _ simitian ~ordon _statemenC on _high-speed _I... 5112/2011     ROLE AND GUIDING PRINICIPLES OF THE HIGH SPEED RAIL COMMITTEE  OF THE PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL  Adopted   May 17, 2010  Background  In November 2008 California voters approved a nearly ten billion dollar bond measure, the  primary purpose of which is to develop high speed rail (HSR) service from Los Angeles to San  Francisco.  The High Speed Rail Authority has decided that the route HSR will take from San Jose  to San Francisco is along the Caltrain right of way (ROW), including the portion of the ROW that  runs through Palo Alto.  However, the Environmental Impact Report used by the Authority in  making this decision has been de‐certified per court order.  Many issues, such as the vertical  alignment of the HSR, remain undecided.  Recognizing that HSR could have many impacts on  Palo Alto, some quite negative, and that swift City action might be needed in many  circumstances the City Council on May 18, 2009 created an ad hoc High Speed Rail  Subcommittee of four Council Members, (since changed to a standing committee and renamed  the High Speed Rail Committee).  The Council also adopted a set of Guiding Principles which  allowed the Committee to take a variety of actions in the name of the City without action of the  full Council.  During the past year the Committee‐‐‐ indeed the entire community‐‐‐ have learned a great  deal about HSR and many HSR related actions have taken place.  The City Council therefore,  adopts the following Principles to guide its decision making framework and actions of the  Committee:   Role and Authority of the High Speed Rail Committee  The Committee shall advise the City Council on HSR and related rail transit matters and  provide the community with appropriate forums for the discussion of such issues.  The Committee shall keep the full Council informed on a regular basis.  The Committee shall have the authority to act on behalf of the City on HSR and related rail  transit matters when there is not sufficient time to refer a particular issue to the full City  Council before action is needed; however, the Committee shall forward their decision to the  Council for final action if the Committee determines that it is feasible to do within the time  available.  Such actions by the Committee shall include, but not be limited to, testimony      before the state legislature, the HSR Authority,  Congress and other pertinent governmental  agencies and  advocacy (oral or written) pertaining to pending or desired legislation.  Such  actions by the Committee shall be consistent with the following policies of the City:  Guiding Principles  1. The City is opposed to an elevated alignment of HSR/Caltrain in Palo Alto.  2. The City’s preferred vertical alignment of HSR in Palo Alto is below grade.  3. All neighborhoods in Palo Alto affected by HSR should be treated on the same basis with  respect to vertical alignment impacts.  4. The City believes that the pending program EIR for the Central Valley to San Francisco  portion of  HSR is fatally flawed and that the HSR Authority should reopen and  reconsider its decision to use the Pacheco Pass route.  5. The City further believes that the ridership study used by the Authority contains dubious  and erroneous assumptions and that the Legislature should order an independent  ridership study under its direction and control.   6. The City supports the findings of the Legislative Analyst’s Office and State Auditor which  question the viability and accuracy of the Authority’s Business Plan on such matters as  the identification of sufficient, reliable funding sources, project management and  operations of HSR.   7. The City favors legislation which would enable effective implementation of the Peer  Review committee authorized by AB 3034 with respect to HSR.  8. Palo Alto supports transit and urban design solutions that will be compatible with our  economic development strategies, transportation goals, and vision of the transit  corridor within our boundaries; HSR/Caltrain needs to complement the goals and  strategies of our Comprehensive Plan.   9. Palo Alto supports the use of the Context Sensitive Solutions related to HSR and Caltrain  that is effectively funded and implemented by the Peninsula Rail Program and the High  Speed Rail Authority.  10. The High Speed Rail Authority should provide sufficient funding to affected Cities to  allow them to hire experts to study reports requiring feedback and sufficient outreach  to the community to capture their concerns and suggestions.      11. The High Speed Rail Authority should provide realistic renderings of the various  alternatives and also provide simulations that would help to provide an understanding  of the sound and vibrations.   12. Palo Alto strongly supports Caltrain and the commuter rail service at the present or  improved levels of service.  13. Palo Alto also supports the electrification of Caltrain pursuant to its present plans but  independent of HSR.  14. Palo Alto will work cooperatively with neighboring communities with respect to HSR  issues of mutual concern through vehicles such as the Peninsula Cities Consortium.  15. The Guiding Principles of the Committee incorporates Council‐adopted written  comments to the Authority and its Representatives.