HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 8030
City of Palo Alto (ID # 8030)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 10/16/2017
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Council Adoption of Emergency Management Plans
Title: Adoption of a Resolution Approving the Palo Alto Local Hazard
Mitigation Plan and Approval of Three Additional Emergency Management
Plans
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Office of Emergency Services
Recommendation
Staff recommends the City Council:
1) Adopt a resolution approving the Palo Alto Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex to the
2017 County of Santa Clara Countywide Hazard Mitigation Plan.
2) Approve the updated Threats and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA)
required by the THIRA plan review process.
3) Approve the Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan (FFMP) which incorporates the
newly developed Community Wildfire Prevention Plan (CWPP).
4) Consider the previously approved Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) which was
adopted by Council on October 26, 2009 for the 2016 Foothills Fire Management Plan
Update.
Background
Emergency Operations Planning. In January 2016, Council adopted the Emergency Operations
Plan with Resolution 9573. The City of Palo Alto Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) is a
foundational document for emergency management for City staff, key partners, and the
community. The City’s Office of Emergency Services (OES) is responsible for the review,
revision, management, and distribution of the EOP. These three planning activities are
associated plans that support the Emergency Management Phase of Mitigation.1
1. Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.2
1 The standard four phases of Emergency Management are Mitigation, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery. 2 When OES initiated planning, planners adopted the term Local Hazard Mitigation and Adaptation Plan (LHMAP)
to add emphasis to adaptive planning concerning climate change. Santa Clara County continued to use the more
familiar Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) designation for the county-wide planning effort. Since then, Palo
Alto conformed to LHMP as the standardized term for this planning effort.
City of Palo Alto Page 2
The Federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) requires all cities, counties and special
districts to adopt a LHMP to be eligible for participation in and receive disaster mitigation
funding from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Hazard Mitigation Grant
Program (HMGP). The LHMP identifies strategies that reduce or eliminate long-term risk to
people and property from the effects of natural disasters. It contains courses of action that the
City currently follows, or may consider for future implementation, that reduces vulnerability
and expose to future events. The LHMP, which assesses natural hazards only, must be updated
and adopted by resolution every five years to be eligible for local disaster mitigation funds.
In 2004, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) led a regional effort to address
hazard mitigation planning for jurisdictions within its area of responsibility. This regional
template was used by numerous counties and cities within the ABAG planning area to achieve
initial compliance under the DMA. The ABAG process equipped local governments with tools to
complete individual planning processes that met their needs, while pooling resources and
eliminating redundant planning efforts. In 2010, ABAG conducted its second regional planning
effort and during this update, many local governments in Santa Clara County used the ABAG
tools to achieve DMA compliance, including Palo Alto.
2. Foothills Fire Management Plan / Community Wildfire Prevention Plan.
In 2015, City staff members began a review of the Foothills Fire Management Plan. The 2009
Foothills Fire Management Plan (FFMP) Update addressed a broad range of integrated activities
and produced planning documents to address and mitigate the impacts of fire hazards in the
Palo Alto Foothills Area3. The area of interest includes the areas west of Foothills Expressway
to the city limits of Palo Alto. The 2009 Update was approved by Council on October 26, 2009.4
The FFMP addressed fire hazard assessment and regional evacuation routes, wildland fire
management recommendations and mitigations. The FFMP also reviewed non-project related
topics such as municipal ordinances related to wildland fire and recommended staffing levels
for Station 8 in Foothills Park and some related budgetary topics that are now part of other
processes, such as departmental budgets. The prior FFMP proposed an implementation plan
and identified potential funding, and included CEQA documentation for the proposed projects.
Last, it recommended updates to the Pearson-Arastradero Trails Master Plan and Foothills Trail
Maintenance Plan.
This 2016 FFMP update focuses on topics directly related to fire hazard mitigation, emphasizing
project-related improvements. This program is also documented in the City of Palo Alto LHMP
and demonstrates how the City mitigates wildfire risk through the implementation of projects
in the Foothills Community Wildfire Protection Plan (FCWPP).
3 The 2009 Foothills Fire Management Plan can be found online at
http://www.wildfirelessons.net/HigherLogic/System/DownloadDocumentFile.ashx?DocumentFileKey=289fefa7-
3a3a-4961-8ab2-aeb09daa6530. 4 The City Manager Report 326-09 can be found at http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/17449
and the minutes from that meeting can be found at http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/17986.
City of Palo Alto Page 3
The FCWPP is a component to a countywide effort similar to the LHMP.5 The County of Santa
Clara undertook a planning process to generate a countywide community wildfire protection
plan in 2015-2016 in accordance with the federal Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA) of
2003. The purpose of the Santa Clara County CWPP is to assist in protecting human life and
reducing property loss due to wildfire throughout the planning area. The plan is the result of a
communitywide wildland fire protection planning process and the compilation of documents,
reports, and data developed by a wide array of contributors. Palo Alto staff members used this
planning format to link the Foothills Fire Management Plan with the Community Wildfire
Protection Plan. In future updates, the City will combine both documents into the FCWPP.
3. Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment.
In 2013, the City of Palo Alto OES contracted with Dewberry Consultants, LLC to develop the
THIRA in conjunction with the City staff and wider community stakeholders including Stanford
University, Stanford Health Care, and community and business representatives. This project
began in September 2013 and culminated with the report to Council in August 2014 and
publication of the THIRA Executive Summary.6 [The THIRA base document is not releasable to
the public as it contains sensitive information for official use only.]
This assessment provided the outcomes of this process and is compliant with the U.S.
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 201.
1. Identify the Threats and Hazards of Concern. Based on past experience, forecasting, expert
judgment, and available resources, identify a list of the threats and hazards of concern to the
community.
2. Give Threats and Hazards Context. Using the list of threats and hazards, develop context that
shows how those threats and hazards may affect the community.
3. Examine the Core Capabilities Using the Threats and Hazards. Using the threat and hazard
context, identify impacts to the community through the lens of the core capabilities described
in the Goal.
4. Set Capability Targets. Looking across the estimated impacts to the community, in the
context of each core capability and coupled with a jurisdiction’s desired outcomes, set
capability targets.
5. Apply the Results. Plan for the ability to deliver the targeted level of capability with either
community assets or through mutual aid, identify mitigation opportunities, and drive
preparedness activities.
The All hazards risk matrix included the Threats and Hazards of Most Concern:
Natural Hazards
Earthquake
5 The Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan can be found at http://www.sccfd.org/santa-clara-
county-community-wildfire-protection-plan. 6 www.cityofpaloalto.org/thira
City of Palo Alto Page 4
Flood/Severe Winter Storm
Technological Hazards
Airplane Accident
Hazardous Waste/ Materials Spill
Urban Fire
Human-caused Hazards
Major Crime
Cyber Attack
Discussion
1. Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.
In 2016, the Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Services (OES) and Santa Clara County
jurisdictions teamed together to prepare an updated countywide hazard mitigation plan that
would best suit the needs and capabilities of the County and its planning partners. With these
factors in mind, Santa Clara County committed to preparation of its 2017 plan by securing
technical assistance to facilitate a planning process that would comply with all program
requirements. The ensuing planning process developed a new plan for the County and its
planning partners de novo, using lessons learned from the prior planning efforts.
The Santa Clara County Hazard Mitigation Plan identified three high rated natural risks and four
medium rated natural risks affecting the entire county. 7
Hazard Risk Ranking: Santa Clara County
Hazard Ranking Hazard Event Category
1 Earthquake High
2 Flood High
3 Severe Weather High
4 Dam and Levee Failure Medium
5 Landslide Medium
6 Wildfire Medium
7 Drought Medium
In turn, each individual jurisdiction was required to prepare an “Annex” to the County LHMP,
with mitigation strategies specific to the hazard impacts of that jurisdiction.
The City of Palo Alto began our LHMP planning process in 2015 by participating in the
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) mitigation planning workshops. OES staff
followed up this preparation in January 2016 with the development of a project management
plan that described how we would implement the local mitigation planning process. This effort
7 County of Santa Clara LHMP, Not yet posted online, but will be available in the near future at
https://www.sccgov.org/sites/oes/PlansPublications/Pages/LHMP.aspx
City of Palo Alto Page 5
was started in advance of the Santa Clara County effort to receive Mitigation Planning Grant
funding. Palo Alto created two planning structures as recommended by ABAG and included an
inter-departmental city staff planning team as well as an external stakeholder group comprised
of various local organizations representative of our ‘whole community.’ Over the year, the
planning process followed the recommended FEMA planning steps and joined the Santa Clara
County planning process in August 2016.
Palo Alto also created an online website in February 2016 that described our planning process
and served as a data repository for our project teams and for the general public. In May 2016
we highlighted this process on the City’s Homepage. Meeting documentation including internal
planning team minutes, stakeholder team minutes and community engagement summaries can
be found at the end of this annex. The body of documented work is available online at
www.cityofpaloalto.org/lhmap.
The State OES and FEMA have reviewed and recommend the Palo Alto Annex for adoption by
the City and for inclusion with the Santa Clara County Hazard Mitigation Plan.
The Palo Alto Annex identified two high rated natural risks and three medium rated natural
risks.8
Hazard Risk Ranking: Palo Alto
Ran
k Hazard Type Risk Rating Score (Probability x Impact) Category
1 Earthquake 48 High
2 Flood 42 High
3 Severe Weather 33 Medium
4 Wildfire 15 Medium
4 Dam and Levee
Failure
15 Medium
Mitigation Strategies are included in the Palo Alto Annex that when implemented will reduce
the impact by each of these hazards.
2. Foothills Fire Management Plan (FFMP) 2016 Update and 2016 Community Wildfire
Prevention Plan (CWPP), Palo Alto Annex.
This 2016 FFMP update focuses on topics directly related to fire hazard mitigation, emphasizing
project- related improvements. This program is also documented in the City of Palo Alto LHMP
and demonstrates how the City mitigates wildfire risk through the implementation of projects
in the FCWPP. The City of Palo Alto contracted with Wildland Resource Management Group,
who also completed the 2009 FFMP effort, to assist in this update. Staff members from
8 Palo Alto Annex: Santa Clara County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. p. 1-15.
City of Palo Alto Page 6
Community Services, Fire, Public Works Departments and the Office of Emergency Services
formed the planning team to work with Wildland Resource Management Group. Additionally,
members of the Midpeninsula Fire Safe Council also provided input to this update.
The LHMP process enabled staff to more accurately assess the wildfire risk than in previous
planning cycles which resulted in a Medium risk rating when considering number of properties
affected and property values in each of the assessed fire hazard zones – high, medium, and low.
The complimentary Community Wildfire Planning process, using an alternate assessment
model, rated our Foothills area as High, based on fuel loads and potential of fire spread.
A post treatment fire behavior assessment is also included in this update to identify areas of
future treatments based on the wildfire threat. The most important benefit of previous
treatments has been an increased ease of evacuation and emergency access through the
expansion of managed roadside vegetation. The roadsides along Arastradero Road, Los Trancos
Road and Page Mill Road are all safer for access and egress through increased line of sight,
reduced fuel volumes and reduction of ladder fuels. This update also incorporates the
participation in the county-wide Community Wildfire Protection Program (CWPP), which
includes a Palo Alto/Stanford annex.
3. Threats and Hazards Identification and Risk Assessment.
The THIRA plan has a review cycle of every two years. Following the drafting of the LHMP
natural hazards, OES facilitated the 2017 THIRA update. This update revises the identification
of threats and hazards for natural and intentional hazards. Technological hazards were
unchanged in this update.
For the 2017 THIRA Update, OES lead an assessment workshop with select City staff members
and public safety agency stakeholders to conduct a qualitative rating of intentional hazards.
Specific hazards were rated as Very High, High, Medium, or Low based on their likelihood of
occurrence. These ratings were then compared to reported Part 1 and 2 crimes over the past
24 months in Palo Alto to provide a quantitative comparison and yield a final rating of human
caused threats.
The updated listing of threats and hazards of most concern is provided in the table below.
Threats and Hazards of Most Concern
Natural Technological Intentional (Human-Caused)
Earthquake Airplane Accident Major Crime
Flood Hazardous Waste/
Materials Spill Cyber Attack
Severe Storm Urban Fire Workplace Violence
Civil Disorder
City of Palo Alto Page 7
Environmental Impacts
Foothills Fire Management Plan 2016 Update. The project has been assessed in accordance
with the authority and criteria contained in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
the State CEQA Guidelines, and the environmental regulations of the City. Council adopted a
Final Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) on October 26, 2009 for the previously approved
Foothills Fire Management Plan. The proposed 2016 plan update, including the work areas,
environmental conditions at the site, and the treatment methods are consistent with what was
assessed in the previously adopted MND. A link to the previously adopted MND is provided in
Appendix F.
Attachments:
Attachment A - CPA Operational Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
Attachment B - Foothills Fire Management Plan
Attachment C - County Wildfire Protection Plan
Attachment D - THIRA 2017 Update
Attachment E - Resolution
Attachment F - Mitigated Negative Declaration Link
1-1
CITY OF PALO ALTO
ANNEX
3/20/2017 SANTA CLARA OPERATIONAL AREA
HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Contents
iii
CONTENTS
1. City of Palo Alto ................................................................................................................ 1-1
1.1 Hazard Mitigation Plan Point of Contact ................................................................................................... 1-1
1.2 Jurisdiction Profile ..................................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.3 Development Trends .................................................................................................................................. 1-4
1.4 Capability Assessment ............................................................................................................................... 1-6
1.5 Integration with Other Planning Initiatives .............................................................................................. 1-13
1.6 Jurisdiction-Specific Natural Hazard Event History ................................................................................ 1-14
1.7 Jurisdiction-Specific Vulnerabilities ........................................................................................................ 1-15
1.8 Hazard Risk Ranking ............................................................................................................................... 1-15
1.9 Status of Previous Plan Actions ............................................................................................................... 1-15
1.10 Hazard Mitigation Action Plan and Evaluation of Recommended Actions ........................................... 1-15
1.11 Future Needs to Better Understand Risk/Vulnerability ......................................................................... 1-20
1.12 Palo Alto Planning Process .................................................................................................................... 1-20
1.13 Additional Resources ............................................................................................................................. 1-22
1-1
1. CITY OF PALO ALTO
1.1 HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT
Primary Point of Contact Alternate Point of Contact
Nathan Rainey, Emergency Services Coordinator
275 Forest Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Telephone: 650-617-3197
e-mail Address:
Nathaniel.rainey@cityofpaloalto.org
Ken Dueker, Director of Emergency Services
275 Forest Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Telephone: 650-329-2419
e-mail Address:
Kenneth.dueker@cityofpaloalto.org
1.2 JURISDICTION PROFILE
The following is a summary of key information about the jurisdiction and its history:
Date of Incorporation—April 23, 1894
Current Population—68,207 as of January 1, 2016
Population Growth and Demographics—Palo Alto’s population has increased only slightly during the
last 30 years compared to Santa Clara County as a whole. The number of residents increased by 4.7
percent from 55,966 in 1970 to 58,598 in 2000, and 9.9 percent between 2000 and 2010 (U.S. Census
1980, 1990, 2000, and 2010). As of the 2010 Census, population in the City has increased to 64,403.
While the average number of people per household declined from 2.7 in 1970 to 2.3 in 2000, the number
of housing units increased (See Table 1-1).
Table 1-1. Historical Population Growth in Palo Alto, 1990-2010
Year Population Numerical Change Percent Change
1990 55,225 741 1.3
2000 58,598 675 1.2
2010 64,403 5,805 9.9
Source: US Census 1990, 2000, 2010.
Although 64.2 percent of Palo Alto’s population is White, the City is becoming more ethnically diverse.
Asians, Native Hawaiian, and Other Pacific Islanders comprise 27.3 percent, while 0.2 percent are
American Indian/Alaska Native, 6.2 percent are Hispanic, 1.9 percent are Black and 6.4 percent identify
themselves as some other race or two or more races.
The median age of Palo Alto’s population has increased dramatically over the last few decades. In 1970,
the median age was 29.5 for men and 33.7 for women. By 1990, these figures had increased to 36.7 and
40.0 respectively. In the year 2000, the median age for the entire population of Palo Alto was 40.2 years,
which is considerably higher than the County median age of 34 years, and in 2010 it raised further to 41.9
Santa Clara Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan; City of Palo Alto Annex
1-2
years. The increase in median age has been accompanied by an increase in Palo Alto’s senior population;
the number of persons over 65 increased from 10 to 15.6 percent of the population between 1970 and
2000, and 17.1 percent in 2010. The number of older adults is expected to continue to increase in the
future. At the other end of the age spectrum, the number of children under five has increased significantly
over the last two decades and has resulted in an increase in the number of children entering childcare and
school. However, the number of women of childbearing age has decreased markedly after increasing
during the 1980s and 1990s and the middle-aged population has increased significantly indicating that
Palo Alto will continue to grow older during the next decade.
Location and Description—Part of the metropolitan San Francisco Bay Area and the Silicon Valley,
Palo Alto is located within Santa Clara County and borders San Mateo County.
The City’s boundaries extend from San Francisco Bay on the east to the Skyline Ridge of the coastal
mountains on the west, with Menlo Park to the north, and Mountain View to the south. The City
encompasses an area of approximately 26 square miles, of which one-third is open space. The city shares
its borders with East Palo Alto, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Stanford, Menlo Park, Mountain View,
Portola Valley, and portions of unincorporated San Mateo County and Santa Clara County (including the
unincorporated areas of Cupertino and Saratoga in the foothills). It is named after a redwood tree called El
Palo Alto. The city includes portions of Stanford University and its affiliates, is headquarters to a number
of Silicon Valley high-technology companies, including Hewlett-Packard, VMware, Tesla Motors, SAP
and Palintir and has served as an incubator to several other high-technology companies, such as Google,
Facebook, Logitech, Intuit, and PayPal.
A blend of business and residential neighborhoods, anchored by a vibrant downtown, defines Palo Alto’s
unique character. A charming mixture of old and new, Palo Alto’s tree-lined streets and historic buildings
reflect its California heritage. At the same time, Palo Alto is recognized worldwide as a leader in cutting-
edge development, as a quintessential part of Silicon Valley.
Based on data from the City’s business registry in January 2016, there are 168 Firms in Palo Alto with
over 50 employers collectively employing 56,410 employees. While this doesn’t account for all
businesses it shows that the business community is at least the size of the residential population of Palo
Alto. So while the City’s public services are sized for the residential community, they are serving a
population at least double that size.
The City Auditor’s Sales Tax Digest Summary Report from January 2016 lists the top 25 Sales/Use Tax
contributors. The list is in alphabetical order and represents the year ended 2nd Quarter 2015. The Top 25
Sales/Use Tax contributors generate 48.5 percent of Palo Alto’s total sales and use tax revenue are as
follows:
Anderson Honda
Apple Stores
Audi Palo Alto
Bloomingdale’s
Critchfield
Mechanical
CVS/Pharmacy
Eat Club
Fry’s Electronics
Hewlett-Packard
Integrated Archive Systems
Loral Space Systems
Macy’s Department Store
Magnussen’s Toyota
Neiman Marcus Department
Store
Nordstrom Department Store
Pottery Barn Kids
Shell Service Stations
Stanford University Hospital
Tesla Lease Trust
Tesla Motors
Tiffany & Company
Urban Outfitters
Valero Service Stations
Varian Medical Systems
Wilkes Bashford
1. City of Palo Alto
1-3
Brief History—Palo Alto was incorporated in 1894 and received its name from the tall landmark
Redwood tree, El Palo Alto, which still grows on the east bank of San Francisquito Creek across from
Menlo Park. One trunk of the twin-trunked tree can still be found by the railroad trestle near Alma Street
in El Palo Alto Park.
Leland Stanford Junior University opened to 465 students in 1891, as a memorial by Leland and Jane
Stanford to their son who died in 1884 while traveling in Europe. Stanford University played a significant
role in the development of the Palo Alto landscape; it has since grown into a world renowned teaching
and research university with more than 16,000 undergraduate and graduate students.
In 1925 the town of Mayfield, the original settlement that developed in the area in 1853, was annexed to
the larger Palo Alto. In the decades that followed, Palo Alto continued to expand southward reaching the
border it currently shares with Mountain View.
The population more than doubled from 25,000 to 55,000 residents by 1960, and since then has increased
to roughly 68,000 today. During these boom years Palo Alto was transformed from agricultural fields to
urban forest and became the birthplace of the Silicon Valley.
Climate—Typical of the San Francisco Bay Area, Palo Alto has a Mediterranean Climate with cool, wet
winters and warm, dry summers. Typically, in the warmer months, as the sun goes down, the fog bank
flows over the foothills to the west and covers the night sky, thus creating a blanket that helps trap the
summer warmth absorbed during the day (USClimateData.com, 2017). Average high and low temperature
and precipitation by month are shown in Table 1-2.
Table 1-2. Average High and Low temperature and Precipitation by Month
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Average high in °F: 58 62 66 70 74 78 79 79 80 74 65 58
Average low in °F: 38 41 43 45 49 52 57 55 53 48 42 38
Av. precipitation in inch: 3.07 3.19 2.48 0.98 0.47 0.08 0.04 0.04 0.16 0.75 1.97 2.95
The record high temperature was 107 °F (42 °C) on June 15, 1961, and the record low temperature was
15 °F (−9 °C) on November 17, 2003. Temperatures reach 90 °F (32 °C) or higher on an average of 9.9
days. Temperatures drop to 32 °F (0 °C) or lower on an average of 16.1 days.
Due to the Santa Cruz Mountains to the west, there is a "rain shadow" in Palo Alto, resulting in an
average annual rainfall of only 15.32 inches (389 mm). Measurable rainfall occurs on an average of 57
days annually. The wettest year on record was 1983 with 32.51 inches (826 mm) and the driest year was
1976 with 7.34 inches (186 mm). The most rainfall in one month was 12.43 inches (316 mm) in February
1998 and the most rainfall in one day was 3.75 inches (95 mm) on February 3, 1998. Measurable snowfall
is very rare in Palo Alto, but 1.5 inches (38 mm) fell on January 21, 1962.
Governing Body Format—Palo Alto is a Charter City and has a council-manager form of government in
which the nine-member, popularly-elected City Council appoints the City Manager, who in turn oversees
a dynamic Executive Leadership Team in the operation of thirteen departments employing 1,000 staff.
This vibrant organization enjoys a strong, collaborative, and open environment. The Fiscal Year 2016
citywide expenditure budget amounts to $563.6 million, with a General Fund budget of $185.7 million, a
Capital Budget of $124.7 million, and Enterprise Funds of $342.5 million. The City Council assumes
responsibility for the adoption of this plan, the Office of Emergency Services, on behalf of the City
Manager, will oversee its implementation.
Santa Clara Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan; City of Palo Alto Annex
1-4
1.3 DEVELOPMENT TRENDS
Palo Alto comprises 16,627 acres, or about 26 square miles. Approximately 40 percent of this area is in parks and
preserves and another 15 percent consists of agriculture and other open space uses. The remaining area is nearly
completely developed, with single family uses predominating. Less than one percent of the City’s land area
consists of vacant, developable land (City of Palo Alto, 2007). The City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan 2007,
Land Use & Community Design Element and 2007 Zoning Regulations guide the development of public and
private property of which local land use and growth management is a central topic. Figure 1-1 shows the annual
net change in non-residential square footage, based on project applications processed by the Department of
Planning and Community Environment. Net square footage numbers shown represent the total square footage
added by all developments approved in the planning area for the given period, minus the total square footage
demolished. Negative numbers in the table indicate that more non-residential square footage was demolished (or
approved for demolition) than was approved or constructed. As shown, the period between 2010 and 2014 has
seen by far the greatest net increase in non-residential square footage (City of Palo Alto, 2014). Table 1-3
summarizes development trends in the performance period since development of the previous hazard mitigation
plan and expected future development trends.
Table 1-3. Recent and Expected Future Development Trends
Criterion Response
Has your jurisdiction annexed any land since
the development of the previous hazard
mitigation plan?
No
If yes, give the estimated area annexed and
estimated number of parcels or structures.
N/A
Is your jurisdiction expected to annex any
areas during the performance period of this
plan?
No
If yes, please describe land areas and
dominant uses.
N/A
If yes, who currently has permitting
authority over these areas?
N/A
Are any areas targeted for development or
major redevelopment in the next five years?
Yes
If yes, please briefly describe, including
whether any of the areas are in known
hazard risk areas
Commercial and some residential redevelopment occurs continually within Palo Alto
through the normal course of property management. However, one project in the
Fry’s Building / California Avenue area may be redeveloped in the next five years in
which the City will play a leading role. All of Palo Alto is in a seismic risk area, so any
development will have seismic risks.
How many building permits were issued in
your jurisdiction since the development of the
previous hazard mitigation plan?
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Single Family 87 99 113 90 246
Multi-Family 1 12 4 2 5
Other (commercial, mixed use, etc.) 17 25 16 13 17
Please provide the number of permits for each
hazard area or provide a qualitative description
of where development has occurred.
Special Flood Hazard Areas: 129
Landslide: 2
High Liquefaction Areas: 40
Wildfire Risk Areas: 4
Please describe the level of buildout in the
jurisdiction, based on your jurisdiction’s
buildable lands inventory. If no such inventory
exists, provide a qualitative description.
Palo Alto is 99% built out.
1. City of Palo Alto
1-5
Figure 1-1. Citywide Growth in Non-Residential Square Footage 1989-2014
Santa Clara Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan; City of Palo Alto Annex
1-6
1.4 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT
1.4.1 Resources for the 2017 Planning Initiative
The following technical reports, plans, and regulatory mechanisms were reviewed to provide information for
inclusion into the 2017 Multi-Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan for both Volume 1 and Volume 2 (Palo Alto
Annex). All of the below items were additionally reviewed as part of the full capability assessment for Palo Alto.
City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan—The Comprehensive Plan was reviewed for information
regarding goals and policies consistent with hazard mitigation for carry over as goals and objectives.
Additionally, development trends from the Land Use section of the Comprehensive Plan informed the
development section of this annex.
City of Palo Alto Municipal Code—The Municipal Code was reviewed for the full capability
assessment and for identifying opportunities for action plan integration.
Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance—The Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance was reviewed for
compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program.
Capital Improvements Plan—The Capital Improvements Plan was reviewed to identify cross-planning
initiatives for inclusion as mitigation projects.
State of California Local Hazards Mitigation Plan—The state plan was helpful for reviewing goals
and also in assessing hazards.
County of Santa Clara and City of Palo Alto Local Hazards Mitigation Plan (2012)—The previous
LHMP provided a baseline of information for the writing of this document.
Palo Alto Threats and Hazards Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA)—The THIRA helped to
inform the hazard analysis portion of this plan, as well as a source for mitigation actions.
Palo Alto Energy Assurance Plan—The Energy Assurance Plan provided information for the
jurisdiction profile as well as a source for mitigation actions.
Sustainability / Climate Adaptation Plan—This plan provided information for our hazards analysis as
well as identification of mitigation actions.
Foothills Wildfire Management Plan / Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Prevention Plan—
These plans informed our hazards analysis as well as identifying wildfire mitigation actions.
Technical Reports and Information—Outside resources and references used to complete the City of
Palo Alto Annex are identified in Section 1.13 of this annex.
1.4.2 Full Capability Assessment
An assessment of legal and regulatory capabilities is presented in Table 1-4. An assessment of fiscal capabilities
is presented in Table 1-5. An assessment of administrative and technical capabilities is presented in Table 1-6.
Information on National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) compliance is presented in Table 1-7. An assessment of
education and outreach capabilities is presented in Table 1-8. Classifications under various community mitigation
programs are presented in Table 1-9. Development and permitting capabilities are presented in Table 1-10, and
the community’s adaptive capacity for the impacts of climate change is presented in Table 1-11.
1. City of Palo Alto
1-7
Table 1-4. Legal and Regulatory Capability
Local Authority
Other Jurisdiction
Authority State Mandated
Integration
Opportunity?
Codes, Ordinances, & Requirements
Building Code Yes Yes Yes No
Comment: Palo Alto has adopted the 2016 California Building Code
Zoning Code Yes Yes Yes No
Comment: Municipal Code, Title 18, effective 13 June 2016
Subdivisions Yes No No No
Comment: Municipal Code, Title 21, effective 13 June 2016
Stormwater Management No No No No
Comment: None located.
Post-Disaster Recovery No No No No
Comment: None located.
Real Estate Disclosure No No Yes No
Comment: Cal. Civ. Code §1102 et seq.
Growth Management Yes Yes Yes No
Comment: Growth management falls under Palo Alto’s 2007 Zoning Regulations and is more discreetly addressed in the City’s
Comprehensive Plan; Cal. Gov. Code §65300 et seq.
Site Plan Review Yes Yes Yes No
Comment: Site Plan review falls under Palo Alto’s 2007 Zoning Regulations and is well practiced in the permitting process.
Environmental Protection Yes Yes Yes No
Comment: Ordinance 5107, 13 December 2010, to provide green building standards and environmental protections; California
Environmental Quality Act (Guideline: California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Sections 15000–15387)
Flood Damage Prevention Yes Yes No No
Comment: Municipal Code, Chapter 16.52 effective 13 June 2016
Emergency Management Yes Yes Yes No
Comment: Municipal Code, Chapter 2.12 effective 13 June 2016
Climate Change Yes No Yes No
Comment: Ordinance No. 5345, 31 August 2015, to comply with California Energy Code 2013 edition; California SB-379: Land Use:
General Plan: Safety Element
Other: Seismic Hazards Identification Program Yes Yes No No
Comment: In 1986, the City Council adopted the Seismic Hazards and Identification Program codified at Section 16.42 of the Municipal
Code. This ordinance established a mandatory evaluation and reporting program and created incentives for property owners to voluntarily
upgrade their structurally deficient buildings.
Planning Documents
General Plan (As Comprehensive Plan) Yes No Yes No
Palo Alto is undergoing an update to the comprehensive plan, which will be completed in 2017. This updated plan will be compliant with
Assembly Bill 2140.
Comment: The 2007 City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) and 2007 Zoning Regulations guide land use and growth
management decisions in the City. The Land Use & Design, Housing, and Natural Environment Elements contain goals, policies, and
programs related to natural hazards; however, the City is in the process of updating the current Comprehensive Plan which will derive a
new Safety Element from the Natural Environment Element.
Capital Improvement Plan Yes Yes Yes Yes
Comment: The 2017-2021 Capital Improvement Program Plan for the City of Palo Alto guides the City in the planning and scheduling of
infrastructure improvement projects over the five year period. Annually, the City publishes a Capital Improvement Program budget to
guide annual funding of scheduled projects.
Santa Clara Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan; City of Palo Alto Annex
1-8
Local Authority
Other Jurisdiction
Authority State Mandated
Integration
Opportunity?
Floodplain or Watershed Plan No Yes No Yes
Comment: Santa Clara Valley Water District
Stormwater Plan Yes No No No
Comment: The City has a Storm Drain Master Plan, see Other plans below.
Urban Water Management Plan Yes No Yes No
Comment: . The 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) outlines actions that the City could take to achieve varying degree of
water use reduction. The UWMP will be updated by June 30, 2016. Urban Water Management Plans are designed to assess the reliability
of the City’s water sources, support to our long-term resource planning, and ensure adequate water supplies are available to meet
existing and future water demands. Every five years, an Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) is prepared and submitted as required
to the California Department of Water Resources, per the Urban Water Management Planning Act.
Habitat Conservation Plan No Yes No Yes
Comment: 2013 - Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan
Economic Development Plan No No No No
Comment: The primary considerations for this are included in the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
Shoreline Management Plan Yes No No No
Comment: Baylands Master Plan 2008. The 2008 plan is an information update with the goal of producing an up-to-date record of Council
approved policies and actions in the Baylands. It includes the history, environmental setting and adopted planning goals and policies for
the Baylands area.
Community Wildfire Protection Plan Yes Yes No Yes
Comment: Palo Alto has integrated our local CWPP into the Santa Clara County CWPP.
Forest Management Plan Yes No No No
Comment: 2013 - The purpose of the plan is to establish long-term management goals and strategies to foster a sustainable urban forest
in Palo Alto. It was developed using an inter-departmental team of staff in conjunction with Canopy and community partners.
Climate Action Plan Yes No No Yes
Comment: 2014 - The City of Palo Alto launched a new Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) initiative in August 2014 to chart a
path to a more sustainable future, find ways to improve our quality of life, grow prosperity and create a thriving and resilient community—
all while dramatically reducing our carbon footprint. Palo Alto is already a world leader in climate protection strategies. The S/CAP will
build on that leadership — and our successes exceeding the goals of our 2007 climate plan — to create an ambitious plan that also
considers broader issues of sustainability, such as land use and biological resources. Palo Alto staff is already integrating our efforts with
other Bay Area communities and agencies involved in these efforts.
Emergency Operations Plan Yes No No Yes
Comment: 2016 - The Palo Alto Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) identifies the City’s emergency planning, organization, and response
policies and procedures. The EOP also addresses the integration and coordination with other governmental levels and volunteer agencies
when required. It is meant to be considered as a preparedness document, intended to be read and understood before an emergency
occurs. The major purposes of the plan are to distinguish who is in charge, to ensure essential jobs are accomplished, to provide for the
continuity of government, to help citizens and City staff understand the City’s emergency organization, to provide guidance for disaster
education and training, and to provide for the proper transfer of command during an emergency. Palo Alto integrated this effort with the
other jurisdictions in the Northern geography of Santa Clara County including Los Altos, Mountain View, and Sunnyvale.
Threat & Hazard Identification & Risk
Assessment (THIRA)
Yes Yes No (Partial) No
Comment: City of Palo Alto THIRA, 2014: To evaluate the City of Palo Alto’s capabilities for addressing all hazard incidents, the City of
Palo Alto Office of Emergency Services (OES) conducted a collaborative planning process in order to develop the City of Palo Alto 2014
Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA). It is compliant with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 201, Second Edition, released in August 2013, which outlines a process to help communities
identify capability targets and resource requirements necessary to address anticipated and unanticipated risks. The result of the THIRA
process is an organized evaluation of vulnerability and implementation measures based on the necessary capabilities to deal with the
hazards/threats of most concern. This report should inform ongoing City and University planning efforts.
Bay Area UASI, 2016: The Bay Area UASI is required to develop a THIRA as part of grant funding requirements.
1. City of Palo Alto
1-9
Local Authority
Other Jurisdiction
Authority State Mandated
Integration
Opportunity?
Post-Disaster Recovery Plan No No No Yes
Comment: Palo Alto does not currently have a Post Disaster Recovery Plan
Continuity of Operations Plan Yes No No No
Comment: In 2015-2016 Palo Alto initiated planning activities to develop a Continuity of Governance / Continuity of Operations Plan. We
will complete this planning effort in 2017.
Public Health Plan No Yes Yes No
Comment: The Santa Clara County Department of Public Health has responsibility for public health planning across the County.
Other: Yes Yes No Yes
WUI/Foothills Fire Management Plan: This plan was recently updated in 2016. As part of the City’s mitigation of wildland and urban fires,
we have implemented the Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan in cooperation with the Santa Clara County Midpeninsula Fire Safe
Council. This plan pertains to the Palo Alto Foothills area west of the Foothills Expressway and Junipero Serra Boulevard, which
represents a Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) area.
Storm Drain Master Plan: To mitigate ongoing flood risks, in 1990, the City created an independent enterprise fund to fund needed
improvements to the storm drain system with revenue generated through user fees and developed a Storm Drain Master Plan in 1993 to
identify and prioritize a set of projects to increase system capacity and reduce the incidence of street flooding. Property owners approved
a ballot measure in 2005 to increase the City’s monthly storm drain fee and thereby provided funding to implement a set of seven high-
priority capital improvement projects to upgrade the storm drain system.
Table 1-5. Fiscal Capability
Financial Resources Accessible or Eligible to Use?
Community Development Block Grants Yes
Capital Improvements Project Funding Yes
Authority to Levy Taxes for Specific Purposes Yes
User Fees for Water, Sewer, Gas or Electric Service Yes
Incur Debt through General Obligation Bonds Yes
Incur Debt through Special Tax Bonds Yes
Incur Debt through Private Activity Bonds Yes
Withhold Public Expenditures in Hazard-Prone Areas Yes
State-Sponsored Grant Programs Yes
Development Impact Fees for Homebuyers or Developers Yes
Other Yes
Santa Clara Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan; City of Palo Alto Annex
1-10
Table 1-6. Administrative and Technical Capability
Staff/Personnel Resources Available? Department/Agency/Position
Planners or engineers with knowledge of land development and
land management practices
Yes Planning & Community Environment/Planner
Community Services Department/Open Space
Ranger
Engineers or professionals trained in building or infrastructure
construction practices
Yes Public Works/Engineer
Development Services/Building Inspector
Planners or engineers with an understanding of natural hazards Yes Public Works/Engineer
Development Services/Building Inspector
Staff with training in benefit/cost analysis Yes Administrative Services/Program Manager
Planning & Community Environment/Program
Manager
Surveyors Yes Public Works/Surveyor
Personnel skilled or trained in GIS applications Yes Planning & Community Environment, Technical
Analyst Police Department
Scientist familiar with natural hazards in local area Yes USGS, NWS
Emergency manager Yes Office of Emergency Services/Coordinator
Grant writers No
Table 1-7. National Flood Insurance Program Compliance
Criteria Response
What local department is responsible for floodplain management? Public Works
Who is your floodplain administrator? (department/position) Public Works Engineer
Are any certified floodplain managers on staff in your jurisdiction? Yes
What is the date of adoption of your flood damage prevention ordinance? 2004
Does your floodplain management program meet or exceed minimum requirements? Meets
When was the most recent Community Assistance Visit or Community Assistance
Contact?
2015
Does your jurisdiction have any outstanding NFIP compliance violations that need to
be addressed?
No
If so, please state what they are.
Do your flood hazard maps adequately address the flood risk within your jurisdiction? Yes
If no, please state why.
Does your floodplain management staff need any assistance or training to support its
floodplain management program?
Yes
If so, what type of assistance/training is needed? Additional staffing
Does your jurisdiction participate in the Community Rating System (CRS)? Yes
If yes, is your jurisdiction interested in improving CRS Classification? Yes (currently class 7)
Is your jurisdiction interested in joining the CRS program?
How many flood insurance policies are in force in your jurisdiction? 3,665a
What is the insurance in force? $957,293,500 a
What is the premium in force? $4,126,988 a
How many total loss claims have been filed in your jurisdiction? 473 a
How many claims were closed without payment/are still open? 104 / 0 a
What were the total payments for losses? $ 8,984,657.71 a
a. According to FEMA statistics as of October 31, 2017
1. City of Palo Alto
1-11
Table 1-8. Education and Outreach
Criteria Response
Do you have a Public Information Officer
or Communications Office?
Yes. The City Communications Office, Public Safety public information officers, and
Utilities Communication Manager provide public information officer functions.
Do you have personnel skilled or trained in
website development? Yes
Do you have hazard mitigation information
available on your website? Yes. www.cityofpaloalto.org/lhmap & www.cityofpaloalto.org/thira
If yes, please briefly describe. Palo Alto maintains and follows an Open data initiative that makes large amounts of
governmental information available to the public. We have a local hazards mitigation page
on the city website.
Do you utilize social media for hazard
mitigation education and outreach? Yes
If yes, please briefly describe. We have implemented the use of social media using Nextdoor to communicate these
types of information to the public at large.
Do you have any citizen boards or
commissions that address issues related
to hazard mitigation?
Yes - Citizen Corps is a best practice and model advocated by the federal government to
integrate volunteers, non-government entities, the private sector, and other groups with
local programs related to homeland security and emergency management (HS/EM). The
City first formed a Citizen Corps Council (CCC) in 2004. The City later revised the
structure of the in 2009.
Do you have any other programs already
in place that could be used to
communicate hazard-related information?
Yes
If yes, please briefly describe. The City of Palo Alto Website also provides several sources for hazard related information
including a threats and hazards page, but also in our comprehensive plan. Our
emergency services volunteer program also serves as a communications network in their
outreach to neighborhood members as well as their participation in community events.
Do you have any established warning
systems for hazard events? Yes
If yes, please briefly describe. The City participates in the County of Santa Clara mass notification system, AlertSCC, to
get emergency warnings sent directly to cell phone, mobile device, email, or landline.
Table 1-9. Community Classifications
Participating? Classification Date Classified
Community Rating System Yes 7 1990
Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule Yes 1 2015
Public Protection (Palo Alto Fire Department) Yes 2 2012
Storm Ready Yes N/A 2015
Firewise No N/A N/A
Table 1-10. Development and Permit Capabilities
Criterion Response
Does your jurisdiction issue development permits? Yes
If no, who does? If yes, which department? Development Services Department
Does your jurisdiction have the ability to track permits by hazard area? Yes
Does your jurisdiction have a buildable lands inventory? No
Santa Clara Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan; City of Palo Alto Annex
1-12
Table 1-11. Adaptive Capacity for Climate Change
Adaptive Capacity Assessment Jurisdiction Rating
Technical Capacity
Jurisdiction-level understanding of potential climate change impacts High
Comment: The City has a Sustainability Officer who manages a stakeholder team of both internal staff members and external agency
representatives to understand the climate change issues in our area. The City’s Sustainability and Climate Action Plan demonstrates our
understanding of climate change impacts; Palo Alto in engaged in Bay Area conservation planning groups that are also involved in
climate change impacts.
Jurisdiction-level monitoring of climate change impacts High
Comment:
Technical resources to assess proposed strategies for feasibility and externalities High
Comment: Staff members are assigned to assess and propose strategies for climate change impacts. These strategies are then included
in our Comprehensive Plan, Hazard Mitigation Planning, and Sustainability and Climate Action Plan.
Jurisdiction-level capacity for development of greenhouse gas emissions inventory High
Comment: In 2009 Palo Alto published the City’s Climate Protection Plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The Climate Protection
Plan provides a comprehensive inventory of emissions, reduction targets, and steps to reach those targets
(http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/9986). In 2014 the City updated this plan with new emissions data, goals, and
actions. Additionally, the City has developed several programs to further reduce emissions including a long term road map coordinated
through the Sustainability and Climate Action Plan as well as the City’s carbon neutral electric plan.
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/utl/residents/resources/pcm/carbon_neutral_portfolio.asp
Capital planning and land use decisions informed by potential climate impacts High
Comment: As a result of the technical resources assigned to this planning element, Palo Alto incorporates decisions into Comprehensive
Planning, Local Hazard Mitigation Planning, and Sustainability and Climate Action Planning.
Participation in regional groups addressing climate risks High
Comment: Palo Alto staff members are involved in Local, Regional, and National groups studying climate/change and adaption issues.
Implementation Capacity
Clear authority/mandate to consider climate change impacts during public decision-making processes High
Comment: The Palo Alto City Council has established an aggressive GHG reduction goal and is in process of updating its
Comprehensive Plan and adopting a Sustainability and Climate Action Plan that will mandate considering climate change impacts during
public decision-making processes
Identified strategies for greenhouse gas mitigation efforts High
Comment: The City’s Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (scheduled for approval 11/28) identifies strategies for reducing GHG
emissions 80 percent by 2030 (against a 1990 baseline) and for adapting to expected climate change impacts. These include strong
energy efficiency requirements in building codes; exploring electrification (switching customers from natural gas to carbon neutral
electricity); embedding sustainability and climate considerations into the city’s purchasing, operations and capital investment processes;
encouraging shift of private and public vehicles to EVs, supported by expanded EV infrastructure; continued pursuit of the City’s zero
waste goals.
Identified strategies for adaptation to impacts High
Comment: Sustainability and Climate Action Plan
Champions for climate action in local government departments High
Comment: Chief Sustainability Officer sitting on City’s Executive Leadership Team; multi-department Sustainability Board composed of
department directors; 5 to 10 percent of City employees membership of voluntary “green team”
Political support for implementing climate change adaptation strategies High
Comment: Strong community and Council support
Financial resources devoted to climate change adaptation Low
Comment: Currently, the city provides funding for staff members to engage in change adaptation planning including a Chief Sustainability
Officer, and additional departmental staff members on an ad hoc basis. The City has a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) fund that will
provide funding for designated projects. The City Council can allocate funding for change adaptation projects as well.
Local authority over sectors likely to be negatively impacted Low
Comment: The City has not studied intently the sectors likely to be negatively impacted by climate change.
1. City of Palo Alto
1-13
Adaptive Capacity Assessment Jurisdiction Rating
Public Capacity
Local residents knowledge of and understanding of climate risk High
Comment: Palo Alto includes a highly educated community, many of whom we believe understand climate risks. Palo Alto OES hosted a
keynote speaker at a 2016 community town-hall event who spoke on the theory of sea level rise and the worldwide and local impacts of
this threat.
Local residents support of adaptation efforts High
Comment: There is strong local support from what we can tell now for adaptation efforts. The City sponsored a public facing
sustainability workshop in 2016 with the participation of hundreds of community members; many community members are speaking up
about their concerns of climate change, and several organizations have organized action groups (i.e. Palo Alto Green, Save Palo Alto
Groundwater)
Local residents’ capacity to adapt to climate impacts Medium
Comment: TBD. Overall, Palo Alto is one of the national jurisdictions leading the country in consciousness and thought; but the Palo Alto
environment may challenge residential adaptation given our moderate climate (so temperature impacts will probably not be severe except
for our elderly population), and the lifestyle of many high income residents. However, Palo Alto has launched an active “cool block” pilot
program engaging neighbors in joint mitigation/adaptation efforts.
Local economy current capacity to adapt to climate impacts Medium
Comment: Generally strong economy; very energy efficient compared to US; substantial local food production capacity; but generally
unrecognized risk to long term water supplies (impacting potable water, hydropower and agriculture).
Local ecosystems capacity to adapt to climate impacts Medium
Comment: Depends on the extent of the impacts. We can expect successional pressure on ecosystems from temperature and
precipitation changes, other impacts from wildfires and flooding.
1.5 INTEGRATION WITH OTHER PLANNING INITIATIVES
The following describe the jurisdiction’s process for integrating the hazard mitigation plan into local planning.
1.5.1 Existing Integration
The following plans and programs currently integrate the goals, risk assessment and/or recommendations of the
hazard mitigation plan:
Comprehensive Plan—The Local Hazard Mitigation Plan is nested within the City’s Comprehensive
Plan, and many of the policies and programs in the Comprehensive Plan now have mitigation linkages for
the hazards addressed in this plan.
Municipal Code—The City of Palo Alto Municipal Code establishes risk mitigation standards for
building codes that impact our seismic and flood risks.
Sustainability / Climate Action Plan—The City’s Sustainability and Climate Action Plan will be the
primary document that addresses our programs and mitigation actions for climate adaptation.
Seismic Hazards Identification Program—This program will evolve in the near future to provide
additional policies to reduce risks to seismic prone buildings.
Community Rating System—Palo Alto will continue efforts to reduce our CRS rating to reduce flood
risks to those property owners in FEMA designated flood zones.
Energy Assurance Plan—Palo Alto will continue to develop programs and actions that improves our
energy assurance for certain critical infrastructure.
Foothills Fire Management Plan—This plan addresses a broad range of integrated activities and
planning documents to identify and mitigate the impacts of fire hazards in the Palo Alto Foothills Area.
Fire mitigation project areas include the boundaries of Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve
and each year the City allocates resources to treat segments of the project area and to provide public
education and awareness.
Santa Clara Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan; City of Palo Alto Annex
1-14
Water Conservation Best Management Practices (BMP)—Since 2002, the City has partnered with the
Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) to promote and cost-share water efficiency programs for
Palo Alto customers. Through this cost-sharing agreement, the City pays roughly half of the cost of the
programs, with SCVWD administering many of these programs including onsite water audits, and rebates
for landscape conversion as well as water efficient fixtures and appliances. The City also administers
other water conservation programs in-house or through separate contracts with outside vendors, such as
the Home Water Report program. The City continues to evaluate opportunities for program partnership
opportunities with the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency and other regional alliances.
1.5.2 Opportunities for Future Integration
The following plans and programs do not currently integrate the goals, risk assessment and/or recommendations
of the hazard mitigation plan, but provide an opportunity for future integration. They will be reviewed, developed
and updated to include information on hazard risk reduction as feasible and appropriate.
Capital Improvement Program (CIP)—Many of the CIP projects being implemented have a direct or
indirect application to local hazards. Specific projects will become part of our mitigation action plan.
Foothills Fire Management Plan /Community Wildfire Prevention Plan—These action plans will
have a direct correlation to the mitigation action plan in the reduction of fire hazards to our wildland
urban interface area.
Post Disaster Recovery Plan—The City does not have a Post-Disaster Recovery Plan and intends to
develop one as a mitigation planning action during the next five years.
Sustainability/Climate Action Plan—The plan will provide strategies for dealing with anticipated
impacts of climate change in our community. Some of these strategies will manifest mitigation actions
that may be incorporated into future local hazard mitigation planning.
Floodplain Management Plan—The City intends to develop a Floodplain Management Plan.
Firewise—The City intends to meet the Firewise requirements as a public education mitigation action
during the next five years.
Comprehensive Conservation Plan—The City will develop two habitat related plans during the next
five years. The Baylands Comprehensive Conservation Plan will be completed in FY 2017 to address our
shoreline/baylands region; and in FY 2019 we will develop the Foothills, Arastradero, and Esther Clarke
Comprehensive Conservation Plan to cover our additional highlands open spaces.
1.6 JURISDICTION-SPECIFIC NATURAL HAZARD EVENT HISTORY
Table 1-12 lists all past occurrences of natural hazards within the jurisdiction.
Table 1-12. Natural Hazard Events
Type of Event FEMA Disaster # (if applicable) Date Preliminary Damage Assessmenta
Flood DR-1203 1998 $23 milliona
Earthquake DR-845 1989 Unknowna
Flood None 1982 Unknowna
Flood None 1967 Unknowna
Flood None 1958 Unknowna
Flood None 1955 Unknowna
Flood None 1911 Unknowna
Flood None 1862 Unknown
a. Damage assessment information from San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority (2006), except 1862 flood information from
PaloAltoHistory.org (2017).
1. City of Palo Alto
1-15
1.7 JURISDICTION-SPECIFIC VULNERABILITIES
Repetitive loss records are as follows:
Number of FEMA-identified Repetitive-Loss Properties: 1
Number of FEMA-identified Severe-Repetitive-Loss Properties: 0
Number of Repetitive-Loss Properties or Severe-Repetitive-Loss Properties that have been mitigated: 0
Other noted vulnerabilities include:
Preponderance of city staff employees reside outside of Palo Alto
Seismically as risk essential services and public facilities
High density of seismically at risk soft story, concrete tilt up, concrete shear wall buildings
Roughly 20 percent of Palo Alto is exposed to special flood hazard areas
Single grid tied high voltage transmission connection to PG&E
Palo Alto Critical Infrastructure is at risk to the natural hazards identified in this report; the City’s Threat
and Hazards Identification and Risk Analysis provides impacts to Critical Infrastructure.
1.8 HAZARD RISK RANKING
Table 1-13 presents the ranking of the hazards of concern.
Table 1-13. Hazard Risk Ranking
Rank Hazard Type Risk Rating Score (Probability x Impact) Category
1 Earthquake 48 High
2 Flood 42 High
3 Severe Weather 33 Medium
4 Wildfire 15a Medium
4 Dam and Levee Failure 15a Medium
5 Drought 9 Low
6 Landslide 0 None
a. Results were modified based on institutional knowledge not fully captured in the quantitative risk assessment.
1.9 STATUS OF PREVIOUS PLAN ACTIONS
The status of previous actions from the 2011 ABAG LHMP for Santa Clara County can be found in Appendix D
of this volume.
1.10 HAZARD MITIGATION ACTION PLAN AND EVALUATION OF
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
Table 1-14 lists the actions that make up the City of Palo Alto hazard mitigation action plan. Table 1-15 identifies
the priority for each action. Table 1-16 summarizes the mitigation actions by hazard of concern and the six
mitigation types.
Santa Clara Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan; City of Palo Alto Annex
1-16
Table 1-14. Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
Applies to
new or
existing
assets Hazards Mitigated
Objectives
Met Lead Agency
Estimated
Cost
Sources of
Funding Timeline
PA-1—San Francisquito Creek Lower Reach Flood Reduction and Ecosystem Restoration Project
New Flood / Severe
Weather
5, 6, 8 San Francisquito Creek
Joint Powers Authority
$34 million:
Low
General Fund; HMGP;
FMA
0-1 Years
(Short-term)
PA-2— San Francisquito Creek Upper Reach Flood Reduction and Ecosystem Restoration Project
New Severe Storm / Flood 2, 5, 6, 8 San Francisquito Creek
Joint Powers Authority
Medium General Fund; HMGP;
FMA
1-2 Years
(Short-term)
PA-3—Newell Creek Bridge replacement project to accommodate a 100 year flood event
New Flood / Severe
Weather
2, 5, 6, 8 Palo Alto Public Works Low CALTRANS / SCVWD 2-5 Years
(Short-term)
PA-4—Pope Chaucer Street Bridge replacement project to address 100 year flood event
Existing Flood / Severe
Weather
2, 5, 6, 8 Santa Clara Valley
Water District
Low SCVWD 2-5 Years
(Short-term)
PA-5—Matadero Creek Storm Water Pump Station Improvements
New Flood / Severe
Weather
6, 8 Palo Alto Public Works $6 million: Low CIP: SD-13003 0-1 Years
(Short-term)
PA-6—Storm Drain System Replacement and Rehabilitation
Existing Flood / Severe
Weather
6, 8 Palo Alto PW $ 1.5 million:
Low
CIP: SD-06101 Annually
(Ongoing)
PA-7—Recycled Water Pipeline Expansion Project to expand the recycled water purple pipeline within South Palo Alto towards Stanford
Research Park
Existing Drought 5, 6 Palo Alto Public Works $30 million:
Low
CIP: WS-07001 1-3 Years
(Short-term)
PA-8—Continue to maintain good standing and compliance in the NFIP and improve Community Rating System Class to provide higher
CRS premium discounts
Existing Flood / Severe
Weather
1, 2, 3, 4 Palo Alto Public Works Low General Fund 2-3 Years
(Short-term)
PA-9—Execute the SAFER Bay Project to protect critical infrastructure and property and restore historic marshlands
New Severe Storm / Flood /
Sea Level Rise
2, 5, 6, 8 San Francisquito Creek
Joint Powers Authority
High Combination
CIP: OS-09002
Unknown
(Long-term)
PA-10—Construct new Public Safety Building to mitigate current risks to public safety essential services
New Earthquake 6, 9 Palo Alto Public Works $57 million:
Medium
CIP: PE-15001 5 -7 Years
(Long-term)
PA-11—Rebuild Fire Stations 3 and 4 to mitigate current risks to essential services
New Earthquake / Flood /
Sea Level Rise
6, 8 Palo Alto Public Works $15 million:
Low
CIP: PE-15003 2-4 Years
(Short-term)
PA-12—Continue 7 year cycle for high priority of tree trimming
Existing Earthquake/ Flood /
Severe Weather
6,8 Palo Alto Public Works Low General Fund Annually
(Ongoing)
PA-13—Replace the Baylands Tide Gate
Existing Flood / Severe
Weather
6, 8 Santa Clara Valley
Water District
Medium SCVWD Unknown
(Long-term)
PA-14—Consider the use of alternative energy sources for critical infrastructure (essential facilities, key resources)
Existing Earthquake / Severe
Weather
3, 5 Palo Alto Office of
Sustainability
High Staff Time; General
Fund
Unknown
(Long-term)
1. City of Palo Alto
1-17
Applies to
new or
existing
assets Hazards Mitigated
Objectives
Met Lead Agency
Estimated
Cost
Sources of
Funding Timeline
PA-15—Implement Wastewater Long-Range Facilities Plan
Existing Flood / Severe
Weather / Earthquake /
Sea Level Rise
6, 8 Palo Alto Public Works $3-20 million:
Low
CIP: WQ-10001 Annually
(Ongoing)
PA-16—Conduct a feasibility analysis concerning the continued use of water reservoirs in the Foothills region
Existing Earthquake / Wildfire /
Drought
5, 6 Palo Alto Utilities Medium General Fund 3-5 Years
(Short-term)
PA-17—Consider construction of a new water reservoir in the low lying areas of Palo Alto
New Earthquake / Drought 5, 6 Palo Alto Utilities Medium General Fund; Possibly
HMGP
3-5 Years
(Short-term)
PA-18—Rebuild and Reconfigure Electric System in Stanford Hospital/Mall Area to increase reliability during emergencies
Existing Earthquake / Severe
Weather
5, 8 Palo Alto Utilities Low CIP: EL-17004 3-5 Years
(Short-term)
PA-19—Install Fiber Optic Service to Black Mountain Radio Repeater Site to improve public safety communications along Skyline Drive
New Earthquake / Severe
Weather / Wildfire
9 Palo Alto Utilities Medium CIP: TBD 2-3 Years
(Short-term)
PA-20—Convert overhead utility lines to underground transmission. Installation of new underground electric, communication, and cable
television systems in Electric Underground Districts 46 and 47
Existing Earthquake / Severe
Weather
6, 8 Palo Alto Utilities $2.0 million:
Low
CIP: EL-12001 / EL-
11010
1-4 Years
(Short-term)
PA-21—Construct a second electrical transmission interconnection to PG&E using a new corridor
New Earthquake / Severe
Weather
1, 5 Palo Alto Utilities High CIP; Possible HMGP,
PDM
Unknown
(Long-term)
PA-22—Construct a second water interconnection from Palo Alto Utilities to Stanford Hospital
New Earthquake / Severe
Weather
2, 6 Palo Alto Utilities High CIP; Possible HMGP,
PDM
3-5 Years
(Short-term)
PA-23—Connect Palo Alto to adjacent Public Safety agencies' Public Safety Answering Points by Fiber
Existing Earthquake / Severe
Weather
9 Palo Alto Police
Department
High CIP; Possible HMGP,
PDM
Unknown
(Long-term)
PA-24—Implement a Public Safety Wireless Data Network
New Earthquake / Severe
Weather /
9 Palo Alto Police
Department
High CIP; Possible EMPG Unknown
(Long-term)
PA-25—Conduct a Hydrology Study on Buck-Eye Creek for flood protection and erosion control at Foothills Park
Existing Flood / Severe
Weather
6, 8 Palo Alto Community
Services Department
$105 K: Low CIP: PG-15000 2-4 Years
(Short-term)
PA-26—Develop a Baylands Comprehensive Conservation Plan
Existing Flood / Severe
Weather / Sea Level
Rise
1, 3 Palo Alto Community
Services Department
$330 K: Low CIP: PG-17000 1-2 Years
(Short-term)
PA-27—Address hazardous fuels and reduce structural ignitability in the Foothills region in accordance with the Community Wildfire
Protection Plan and Foothills Fire Management Plan
Existing Wildfire 2, 3, 6, 8 Palo Alto Fire
Department
$150 K: Low General Funds Annually
(Ongoing)
PA-28—Encourage creation by Foothills Residents of a Firewise Ready Community
Existing Wildfire 2, 3, 4, 8 Palo Alto OES Low Staff Time; General
Funds
1-2 Years
(Short-term)
Santa Clara Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan; City of Palo Alto Annex
1-18
Applies to
new or
existing
assets Hazards Mitigated
Objectives
Met Lead Agency
Estimated
Cost
Sources of
Funding Timeline
PA-29—Consider a policy for Seismic Retrofitting of earthquake prone structures
Existing Earthquake 2, 3, 5, 8 Palo Alto Development
Services
Low Staff Time; General
Funds
1-2 Years
(Short-term)
PA-30—Develop a Policy for Sea-Level Rise considerations (what actions should the City take)
Existing Sea Level Rise 2, 3, 5 , 8 Sustainability Low Staff Time; General
Funds
1-2 Years
(Short-term)
PA-31—Develop a post-disaster Community Long-term Recovery Plan
New All Hazards 1, 2, 4 Palo Alto OES Medium Staff Time; General
Funds
3-5 Years
(Short-term)
PA-32—Conduct public education that raises awareness of Palo Alto threats and hazards and improves community resilience
Existing All Hazards 1, 2, 4 Palo Alto OES Low Staff Time; General
Funds
Annually
(Ongoing)
PA-33—Maintain Storm Ready Community designation
Existing Severe Storm 2, 4, 9 Palo Alto OES Low Staff Time; General
Funds
Annually
(Ongoing)
PA-34—Improve Palo Alto Fire Department ISO rating
Existing All Hazards 1, 2, 3, 4, Palo Alto Fire
Department
Low Staff Time; General
Funds
1-2 Years
(Short-term)
PA-35—Maintain Building Effectiveness Grading Schedule classification of 1
Existing All Hazards 3, 8 Palo Alto Development
Services
Low Staff Time; General
Funds
Annually
(Ongoing)
PA-36—Where appropriate, support retro-fitting, purchase or relocation of structures located in high hazard areas and prioritize those
structures that have experienced repetitive losses
Existing All Hazards 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Palo Alto Development
Services High HMGP, PDM, FMA Short-term
PA-37—Integrate the hazard mitigation plan into other plans, ordinances and programs that dictate land use decisions within the
community
New and
Existing All Hazards 2, 4, Development Services
Department Low Staff Time, General
Funds Ongoing
PA-38—Actively participate in the plan maintenance protocols outlined in Volume 1 of the hazard mitigation plan.
New and
Existing All Hazards 1, 5 Palo Alto OES Low Staff Time; General
Funds Short-term
1. City of Palo Alto
1-19
Table 1-15. Mitigation Strategy Priority Schedule
Action
#
# of
Objectives
Met Benefits Costs
Do Benefits
Equal or
Exceed
Costs?
Is Project
Grant-
Eligible?
Can Project
Be Funded
Under Existing
Programs/
Budgets?
Implementation
Prioritya
Grant
Pursuit
Prioritya
PA-1 3 High Low Yes Yes Yes High High
PA-2 4 High Medium Yes Yes Yes High High
PA-3 4 High Low Yes Yes Yes High High
PA-4 4 High Low Yes Yes Yes High High
PA-5 2 Medium Low Yes Yes Yes High High
PA-6 2 Medium Low Yes Yes Yes High High
PA-7 2 Low Low Yes No Yes High Low
PA-8 4 Medium Low Yes No Yes High Low
PA-9 4 Medium High No Yes No Low Low
PA-10 2 High Medium Yes No Yes High Low
PA-11 2 High Low Yes No Yes High Low
PA-12 2 High Low Yes No Yes High Low
PA-13 2 Medium Medium Yes No Yes Medium Low
PA-14 2 Low High No Yes No Low Low
PA-15 2 Medium Low Yes No Yes High Low
PA-16 2 Medium Medium Yes No No Medium Low
PA-17 2 Medium Medium Yes Yes No Medium Medium
PA-18 2 High Low Yes No Yes High Low
PA-19 1 Medium Medium Yes No No Low Low
PA-20 2 High Low Yes No Yes High Low
PA-21 2 Medium High No No No Medium Low
PA-22 2 Medium High No No No Medium Low
PA-23 1 Medium High No Yes No Low Low
PA-24 1 Medium High No No No Medium Low
PA-25 2 Low Low Yes No Yes High Low
PA-26 2 Medium Low Yes No Yes High Low
PA-27 4 High Low Yes Yes Yes High High
PA-28 4 High Low Yes No Yes High Low
PA-29 4 Medium Low Yes Yes Yes High High
PA-30 4 Medium Low Yes Yes Yes High High
PA-31 3 Medium Medium Yes Yes Yes High Medium
PA-32 3 High Low Yes No Yes High Low
PA-33 3 High Low Yes No Yes High Low
PA-34 4 High Low Yes No Yes High Low
PA-35 2 High Low Yes No Yes High Low
PA-36 5 High High Yes Yes No Medium High
PA-37 2 Medium Low Yes No Yes High Low
PA-38 2 Low Low Yes No Yes High Low
a. See the introduction to this volume for explanation of priorities.
Santa Clara Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan; City of Palo Alto Annex
1-20
Table 1-16. Analysis of Mitigation Actions
Action Addressing Hazard, by Mitigation Typea
Hazard Type 1. Prevention
2. Property
Protection
3. Public
Education and
Awareness
4. Natural
Resource
Protection
5.
Emergency
Services
6. Structural
Projects
7. Climate
Resilient
Earthquake PA-14, PA-15,
PA-35, PA-37,
PA-38
PA-16, PA-29,
PA-36
PA-31, PA-32 PA-14, PA-18,
PA-19, PA-22,
PA-23, PA-24,
PA-34, PA35
PA-10, PA-11,
PA-17, PA-20,
PA-21
Flood PA-1, PA-2, PA-3,
PA-4, PA-5, PA-6,
PA-9, PA-13, PA-15,
PA-25, PA-26,
PA-30, PA-35,
PA-37, PA-38
PA-1, PA-2,
PA-3, PA-4,
PA-5, PA-6,
PA-9, PA-13,
PA-30, PA-36
PA-8, PA-31,
PA-32
PA-9,
PA-25,
PA-26
PA-8, PA-34,
PA-35
PA-11, PA-17,
PA-21
PA-1, PA-2,
PA-9
Severe
Weather
PA-1, PA-2, PA-3,
PA-4, PA-5, PA-6,
PA-9,PA-15, PA-26,
PA-35, PA-37,
PA-38
PA-1, PA-2,
PA-3, PA-4,
PA-5, PA-6,
PA-9, PA-36
PA-8, PA-31,
PA-32, PA-33
PA-26 PA-8, PA-18,
PA-19, PA-22,
PA-23, PA-24,
PA-33, PA-34,
PA35
PA-20, PA-21
Wildfire PA-27, PA-35,
PA-37, PA-38
PA-16, PA-27,
PA-28, PA-36
PA-28, PA-31,
PA-32
PA-27 PA-27, PA-34,
PA-35
Dam and Levee
Failure
PA-37, PA-38 PA-36 PA-31, PA-32 PA-34 PA-9
Drought PA-37, PA-38 PA-16, PA-36 PA-31, PA-32 PA-7 PA-17
a. See the introduction to this volume for explanation of mitigation types.
1.11 FUTURE NEEDS TO BETTER UNDERSTAND RISK/VULNERABILITY
The City of Palo Alto has identified that more information is needed to understand the potential for impacts from
the Searsville Dam. Palo Alto’s susceptibility to risks associated with inundation caused by the failure of local
Dams is a function of how much water is actually stored in the three dams within the watersheds that flow
through Palo Alto. The City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Report provides an analysis
of the risks provided by Felt Lake Dam, Lagunitas Reservoir Dam, and Searsville Dam (City of Palo Alto, 2016).
We have strong evidence that Felt Lake and Lagunitas Reservoir Dams have negligible impact due to the low
volumes of water they store. Searsville Dam is now heavily silted and stores only approximately 30 percent of its
total capability. We will work with Stanford University to develop a better understanding of risks and impacts
from this Dam.
1.12 PALO ALTO PLANNING PROCESS
The City of Palo Alto began our LHMP planning process in 2015 by participating in the Association of Bay Area
Governments (ABAG) mitigation planning workshops. We followed up this preparation in January 2016 with the
development of a project management plan that described how we would implement the local mitigation planning
process. This effort was started in advance of the Santa Clara County effort to receive Mitigation Planning Grant
funding. Palo Alto created two planning structures as recommended by ABAG and included an inter-departmental
city staff planning team as well as an external stakeholder group comprised of various local organizations
1. City of Palo Alto
1-21
representative of our ‘whole community.’ Over the year, the planning process followed the recommended steps in
the FEMA Process Map and joined the Santa Clara County planning process in August 2016.
Palo Alto also created an online website (cityofpaloalto.org/lhmap) in February 2016 that described our planning
process and served as a data repository for our project teams and for the general public. In May 2016 we
highlighted this process on the City’s Homepage.
Meeting documentation including internal planning team minutes, stakeholder team minutes and community
engagement summaries can be found at the end of this annex and are available online at
www.cityofpaloalto.org/lhmap.
Figure 1-2. Meeting Roadmap for ABAG Planning Process
Santa Clara Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan; City of Palo Alto Annex
1-22
Figure 1-3. City of Palo Alto Homepage with Information on Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
1.13 ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
The following sources were used for information throughout this annex:
City of Palo Alto. 2007. City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan 2007, p. L-4. Accessed online at
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/8170
City of Palo Alto. 2014. Comprehensive Plan Update: Land Use; Draft Existing Conditions Report – City of Palo
Alto, August 29, 2014, p. 8-31. http://www.paloaltocompplan.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/8_LandUse.pdf
City of Palo Alto. 2016. City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Report, 2016. Hydrology
and Water Quality, p. 4.8-38 & 39. Accessed online at http://www.paloaltocompplan.org/wp-
content/uploads/2016/02/4-8_HydrologyWaterQuality.pdf
PaloAltoHistory.org. 2017. The Christmas Flood: “All Through the House… was Mud”. Web page accessed
online at http://www.paloaltohistory.org/the-christmas-flood.php.
San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority Proposition 1E Grant Proposal.
http://www.water.ca.gov/irwm/grants/docs/Archives/Prop1E/Submitted_Applications/P1E_Round1_SWFM/San
%20Francisquito%20Creek%20Joint%20Powers%20Authority/Att7_SWF_DReduc_1of3.pdf.
San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority. 2006. San Francisquito Creek Flood Damage Reduction and
Ecosystem Restoration Project Report. Accessed online at http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/cityagenda/publish/jpa-
meetings/63.pdf.
USClimateData.Com. 2017. Palo Alto Climate Data web page. Accessed online at
http://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/palo-alto/california/united-states/usca0830
Santa Clara Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan/City of Palo Alto Annex
Stakeholder Team Minutes and Community
Engagement Summaries
1
The Final PDF version of this document includes 173 pages of Planning Team and Stakeholder Team Minutes
and Engagment Summaries.
TETRA TECH
FOOTHILLS FIRE
MANAGEMENT PLAN
2016 UPDATE
1/23/2017
1/23/2017
Final Draft
Page 2 of 36
Acknowledgements
This document was prepared by Wildland Resource Management under contract to the City of Palo Alto.
Contributions
Daren Anderson…………………………... Community Services Department
Curt Dunn……………………………………..Community Services Department
Walter Passmore…………………………..Public Works Department
Dinaa Alcocer………………………………..Public Works Department
James Henrickson-----------------------Fire Department
Nathan Rainey………………………………Office of Emergency Services
Mark Nadim …………………………………Midpenninsula Fire Safe Council
Image 1: Palo Alto FIre Department Brush Rig Patrolling Trapper's Trail
Final Draft
Page 3 of 36
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 4
Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Process ......................................................................................... 4
Accomplishments .......................................................................................................................................... 5
Post-Treatment Fire Behavior ....................................................................................................................... 6
New Recommendations ................................................................................................................................ 7
Program Costs ............................................................................................................................................... 7
APPENDICES .................................................................................................................................................. 8
APPENDIX A. Treated Areas .......................................................................................................................... 9
APPENDIX B. New Treatments Areas and Activities ..................................................................................... 0
APPENDIX C - Treatment Areas to be Abandoned or Revised ....................................................................... 3
APPENDIX D – Program Costs ........................................................................................................................ 0
Image 2:Treated area in Foothills Park
Final Draft
Page 4 of 36
Executive Summary
The 2009 Foothills Fire Management Plan (FFMP) addressed a broad range of integrated activities and
produced planning documents to address and mitigate the impacts of fire hazards in the Palo Alto
Foothills Area. The area of interest includes the areas west of Foothills Expressway to the city limits of
Palo Alto.
The FFMP addressed fire hazard assessment and regional evacuation routes, wildland fire management
recommendations and mitigations. The FFMP also reviewed non- project related topics such as
Municipal ordinances related to wildland fire and recommended staffing levels for Station 8 in Foothills
Park. It proposed an implementation plan and identified potential funding, and included CEQA
documentation for the proposed projects. Last, it recommended updates to the Pearson-Arastradero
Trails Master Plan and Foothills Trail Maintenance Plan.
This 2016 FFMP update focuses on topics directly related to fire hazard mitigation, emphasizing project-
related improvements. This program is also documented in the City of Palo Alto Local Hazard Mitigation
and Adaptation Plan (LHMAP) and demonstrates how the City mitigates wildfire risk through the
implementation of projects in the FCWPP.
This update provides a description of significant accomplishments achieved since 2009 in the areas of
treatment of evacuation routes, prescribed fire and associated containment lines, and residential boundary
treatments (mowing, disking). Program costs are also provided showing how allocated funds were used.
City funding since 2009 has totaled $452,332.
A post treatment fire behavior assessment is also included in this update to describe the threat but also
to identify areas of future treatments. The most important benefit has been an increased ease of
evacuation and emergency access through the expansion of managed roadside vegetation. The
roadsides along Arastradero Rd, Los Trancos Rd and Page Mill Rd are all safer for access and egress
through increased line of sight, reduced fuel volumes and reduction of ladder fuels. The probability of
ignitions has been reduced through a reduction of fuels near barbeques and structures, and along
roadsides. The potential for containment of a wildfire (both within the parks, and between City property
and neighbors) has been enhanced through the creation, maintenance, and enhancement of reduced
fuel zones. These treatment areas are strategically placed along property perimeters and ridgelines.
The update also incorporates the participation in the county-wide Community Wildfire Protection Program
(CWPP), which includes a Palo Alto/Stanford annex.1 The county CWPP project began after the initiation of
this planning update, but future updates will be transitioned to the Palo Alto/Stanford Community Wildfire
Protection Plan on a five year update cycle.
Foothills Fire Management Plan Update Process
The 2009 Foothills Fire Management Plan (FFMP) addressed a broad range of integrated activities and
produced planning documents to address and mitigate the impacts of fire hazards in the Palo Alto
Foothills Area. The area of interest includes the areas west of Foothills Expressway to the city limits of
1 The Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Program (CWPP) is a collaborative approach for reducing
wildland fire risks to communities and the environment. The plan includes an analysis of conditions such as fire
apparatus access, community evacuation, fuels, topography, and weather. The plan also includes proposed projects
developed through the workshops. http://www.sccfd.org/santa-clara-county-community-wildfire-protection-plan
Final Draft
Page 5 of 36
Palo Alto.
The 2009 Plan addressed fire hazard assessment and regional evacuation routes, wildland fire
management recommendations and mitigations. The FFMP also reviewed non-project related topics
such as Municipal ordinances related to wildland fire and recommended staffing levels for Station 8 in
Foothills Park. It proposed an implementation plan and identified potential funding, and included CEQA
documentation for the proposed projects. Last, it recommended updates to the Pearson-Arastradero
Trails Master Plan and Foothills Trail Maintenance Plan.
This 2016 update focuses on topics directly related to fire hazard mitigation, emphasizing project-
related improvements. This program is also documented in the City of Palo Alto Local Hazard Mitigation
and Adaptation Plan (LHMAP) and demonstrates how the City mitigates wildfire risk through the
implementation of projects in the FCWPP. The City of Palo Alto contracted with Wildland Resource
Management Group, who also completed the 2009 FFMP effort, to assist in this update. Staff members
from Community Services, Fire, Public Works Departments and the Office of Emergency Services formed
the planning team to work with Wildland Resource Management Group. Additionally, members of the
Midpennisula Fire Safe Council also provided input to this update.
Accomplishments
Since the Foothills Fire Management Plan was adopted in Jan 2009 significant progress has been made.
Perhaps two of the most significant accomplishments have been advances in organization and
relationships.
The City will be taking an additional step to adopt the FFMP as a Community Wildfire Protection Plan.
With a Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP), the City is in a better position to receive grants from
Federal or State funding sources. Because the FFMP satisfied the requirements of a CWPP, the City was
able to simply obtain an approval signature from the local CAL FIRE representative and send it to the
California Fire Alliance where it became official.
Another significant advance was the development of an ongoing relationship with the Santa Clara County
Fire Safe Council (SCFSC). The City developed a 5-year Stewardship Agreement with the SCFSC to help
implement the FFMP/CWPP. An annual work plan is mutually agreed-upon, based on availability of
funding and capacity of the SCFSC. The SCFSC typically supervises and pays for CAL FIRE hand crews to
reduce fuels along roads and in say Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve, and provides
community outreach and education programs in the City regarding wildland fire.
A novel organizational strategy was adopted which recognizes that the FFMP involves and requires
support from many City Departments. While the program originated in the Fire Department, the Public
Works Department, Office of Emergency Services and Community Services Department are all key to the
success and beneficiaries of the projects. As such, representatives of each of these four departments
meet regularly (generally quarterly, but sometimes more often) to strategize effective actions. The
Chair of this inter-departmental group rotates between the departments. Funding is pooled from all
four departments based on the anticipated costs of performing fire hazard reduction work under their
responsibility. For example, roadside treatments on public right-of-ways are funded by Public Works
whereas evacuation treatments along roads inside parks are funded by the Community Services
Department.
Through efforts and funding of the City and with support of the SCFSC, many on-the-ground projects
Final Draft
Page 6 of 36
have been completed, resulting in reduced risk of damage from wildfire and safer evacuation routes and
emergency access. While the relationship with the SCFSC has been a major benefit to the program, the
City Parks and Recreation staff support has also been essential and effective. Coordination of equipment
use and storage, as well as assistance in observing conditions on the ground has greatly bolstered the
effectiveness of the SCFSC efforts.
Spatial information, encompassing the planning and monitoring of work location, costs, and schedule
has been aided by the collection of project boundaries and associated data through the use of a
geographic information system (GIS). Both Google Earth and ESRI-based software compatible with the
City of Palo Alto GIS were used. Planning, analysis and project organization is currently done with digital
spatial files.
Outreach and education regarding fire hazards in the Foothills has been accomplished in concert with
the SCFSC. For example, when the City Office of Emergency Services hosted an educational event the
local SCFSC manager provided a presentation regarding vegetation management and fire safety. More
recently, the SCFSC has coordinated resident-contractor efforts to reduce vegetative fuels along Los
Trancos Road on both public right of way and private yards, with debris disposal provided by Woodside
Fire Protection District.
Treatment of vegetation during the previous 5 years in the Foothills has been ambitious. In addition to
the annual mowing and disking, and periodic treatments of trappers Trail, many areas that had not been
treated in several years, were tackled. In some locations treatment areas were widened or otherwise
expanded. Details of the program accomplishments appear in Appendix A, but a synopsis follows:
• Treatment of evacuation routes within City boundaries on public roads
o Pearson-Arastradero Rd.
o Page Mill Rd.
o Los Trancos Rd.
• Treatment of evacuation routes within City parks
o Wild Horse Valley leading to Towle Campground
o Foothill Park from Maintenance Yard to Gate
o Foothill Park to Hewlett Property
• Prescribed Fire and Associated Containment Lines
• Residential boundary treatments (mowing, disking)
o West and East of Pearson-Arastradero
o South of residents on Foothill Park (NE of gate)
Post-Treatment Fire Behavior
As a result of the implementation of the FFMP/CWPP the fire behavior has changed, with several
concrete benefits. The most important benefit has been an increased ease of evacuation and
emergency access through the expansion of managed roadside vegetation. The roadsides along
Arastradero Rd, Los Trancos Rd and Page Mill Rd are all safer for access and egress through increased
line of sight, reduced fuel volumes and reduction of ladder fuels. The probability of ignitions has been
reduced through a reduction of fuels near barbeques and structures, and along roadsides. The potential
for containment of a wildfire (both within the parks, and between City property and neighbors) has been
enhanced through the creation, maintenance, and enhancement of reduced fuel zones. These treatment
areas are strategically placed along property perimeters and ridgelines.
A spatial depiction of the change in fire hazard is presented by maps in Appendix E. The fire behavior
Final Draft
Page 7 of 36
modeling used FlamMap, based on LandFire data and modified through a series of decision-rules applied
to treatment areas. For example, places that were covered with shrubs and chaparral under oak
woodlands that were treated near roads were changed to a fuel type that typifies an oak woodland with
an open understory. Details regarding the fire behavior modeling process and results appears in
Appendix E.
New Recommendations
As with most vegetation management projects, the initial treatments require the most substantial
effort; maintenance tends to require less of an effort. Initial treatments have been done in most
locations, and are in “maintenance mode”. While Appendix A describes the areas successfully treated
(many which require annual treatments), it also lists areas not treated, and Appendix B recommends
new areas to be treated. Since vegetative growth is cyclical and highly dependent on environmental
factors, the planning team will conduct annual assessments to determine the areas to be treated and the
level of effort that provides the highest benefit for the current costs of treatment.
Because of the success in treating areas identified in the FFMP, new and additional areas have been
identified for treatment, based oncurrent hazardous conditions as demonstrated in a fire behavior
analysis, and potential benefit to the City and region as observed by staff.
Details of new, additional recommended projects appear in Appendix B. The most significant additional
new treatment area is the east side of Page Mill Road within the City boundaries and owned by Mid–
Penninsula Open Space District (MROSD). Other new treatment areas are within City Parks. The most
significant project aimed at residents will be an endeavor to designate the Foothills of Palo Alto as a
FireWise Community.
A few locations have been removed from the list of projects recommended for treatment, or the areas
have been reduced in size, due to changing landownership, staffing duties and fuel conditions. These
generally occur within Pearson-Arastradero Park, and do not result in a significant decrease in hazard.
These treatment areas are detailed in Appendix C.
Program Costs
The initial 5-year cost of the program was estimated at $700,000. City funding since 2009 has totaled
$452,332. Costs for hand crews was greatly reduced through the use of California Department of
Corrections) CDC road crews under supervision of CAL FIRE and the SCFSC, whereas costs for contracted
hand crews was much greater than estimated. Overall, the costs of implementation are approximately
20% higher than estimated.
Future costs of the program are estimated to be relatively stable or slightly higher because of the
reduced costs associated with maintenance as compared with initial treatment, balanced with higher
contract mowing costs. Some areas (such as defensible space treatments) will require annual
treatments, and some areas, such as Trappers Trail, require periodic treatment on a longer interval.
Estimated projected costs appear in Appendix D. The continued relationship with the SCFSC has
provided funding for projects through their partners. For example, funds from PG&E for treatment of
areas within 1000 feet of powerlines on Page Mill Road will augment SCFSC funds dedicated for that
area. Similarly, grants and funds from partners are expected to be aimed at additional eucalyptus
management on Stanford lands within the City. Costs are explained in Appendix D.
• As previously mentioned, the Santa Clara County Fire Department has prepared a county-wide
Final Draft
Page 8 of 36
Community Wildfire Protection Plan, and local planners have incorporated the FFMP into this
plan. This strategy has several benefits; one primary benefit is to become eligible for a broader
suite of funding sources through grants associated with regional efforts. The City also can:
• Retain its site-specific project recommendations within the CWPP
• Retain autonomy in implementation of desired projects
• Be consistent with the City’s and Region’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plans
• Leverage community outreach through regional meetings and solicitation of input
• Build on the County-wide assessment fire hazard in residential areas that are specific to Palo Alto
APPENDICES
Appendix A. Treated Areas
Map 1. Projects Completed
Appendix B. New Treatment Areas and Activities
Map 2. Recommended Projects
Appendix C. Treatment Areas to be Abandoned or Revised
Map 3. Projects to be Abandoned
Appendix D. Program Costs
Table 1. Entity Responsible for Treatment
Appendix F. Technical Report: FlamMap Fire Behavior Results for Palo Alto
Image 3: Mowing to reduce brush along evacuation routes
Final Draft
Page 9 of 36
APPENDIX A. Treated Areas
There area treated within the previous 5 years under the FFMP is expansive. This list indicates the
locations where treatment has occurred, organized by the objective served from treatments. The
locations of these treated areas is shown on Map 1, following this list.
Designation Project Description Source of Work Dates
Completed
Life Safety
Foothills Park
F.F1 Firefighter Safety Zone 1 Trappers Ridge & Los Trancos Trail Mowing Contract annually
F.F2 Firefighter Safety Zone 2 Trappers Ridge & Madrone Fire Road Mowing Contract annually
F.F3 Firefighter Safety Zone 3 Trappers Ridge high point Mowing Contract annually
F.F4 Firefighter Safety Zone 4 Trapper Ridge south end Mowing Contract annually
F.E1
Evacuation Route - Page
Mill Road
Within PA City from Arastradero to
southern Pony Tracks
SCCFSC - CDCR 2015+16
F.E2
Evacuation Route - Park
Road
Entrance to Maintenance Yard to Las
Trampas Valley
SCCFSC - CDCR 2015+16
F.E3
Evacuation Route - Park
Northwest
Interpretive Center to the 600-700
block of Los Trancos Road
Not completed
F.E4
Evacuation Route - Park
Northeast
Boronda Lake to Alexis Drive
Not completed
F.E5
Secondary Evacuation
Route - Wildhorse Valley
Wildhorse Valley from Towle
Campground to Las Trampas Valley
SCCFSC - CDCR 2015
Pearson-Arastradero
A.E1
Evacuation Route –
Arastradero Road
Arastradero Road 2015+16
Off-site
PA.1
Evacuation Route Page
Mill Road
From Foothill Park South to Skyline Rd
SCCFSC – CDCR 2015+16
PA.2
Evacuation Route
Arastradero Road
From Page Mill to Arastradero Pk, and
from Arastradero Pk to Los Trancos
SCCFSC - CDCR 2015+16
PA.3
Evacuation on Los Trancos
Road between Santa Clara
County boundary and Oak
Forest Court
Also noted as FE6
SCCFSC – CDCR +
Contractor
2015+16
PA.4
Evacuation Route Skyline
Blvd.
Skyline Blvd.
SCCFSC -
Contractor
2015
Structure and Infrastructure Protection
Foothills Park
F.D1 Defensible Space Entry Gate and Restroom SCCFSC - CDCR annually
F.D2 Defensible Space Station 8 Fire Dept annually
F.D3 Defensible Space Restrooms at Orchard Glen SCCFSC - CDCR annually
F.D4 Defensible Space Interpretive Center SCCFSC - CDCR annually
F.D5 Defensible Space Maintenance Shop Complex SCCFSC - CDCR annually
F.D6 Defensible Space Boronda Pump Station at Campground SCCFSC - CDCR annually
Final Draft
Page 10 of 36
Designation Project Description Source of Work Dates
Completed
F.D7 Defensible Space Park Tank SCCFSC - CDCR annually
F.D8 Defensible Space Boranda Water Tank Not completed
F.D9 Defensible Space Dahl Water Tank SCCFSC - CDCR annually
Pearson-Arastradero
A.D1 Defensible Space Gateway Building and Restrooms Acterrra, Parks Staff annually
A.D2 Defensible Space Pump Station Parks Staff annually
A.D3 Defensible Space Corte Madera Water Tank SCCFSC - CDCR annually
A.D4 Defensible Space Western Water Tank SCCFSC - CDCR annually
Ignition Prevention
Foothills Park
F.I1 Ignition Prevention Lakeside Picnic Area SCCFSC - CDCR annually
F.I2 Ignition Prevention Shady Cove Picnic Area SCCFSC - CDCR annually
F.I3 Ignition Prevention Encinal and Pine Gulch Picnic Areas SCCFSC - CDCR annually
F.I4 Ignition Prevention Orchard Glen Picnic Area SCCFSC - CDCR annually
F.I5 Ignition Prevention Oak Grove Group Picnic Area SCCFSC - CDCR annually
F.I6 Ignition Prevention Towle Camp SCCFSC - CDCR annually
Containment
Foothills Park
F.C1 Containment Trappers Trail Mowing Contract 2015
F.C2 Containment Pony Tracks south of Trappers Ridge Mowing Contract 2015
F.C3 Containment Pony Tracks north of Trappers Ridge Mowing Contract 2015
F.C4 Containment Bobcat Point Not completed 2015
F.C5 Containment North of Entry Gate Not Completed 2015
F.C6 Containment Valley View Fire Road Not Completed 2015
Pearson-Arastradero
A.C1
Containment
Property boundary adjacent to
Liddicoat
Park Staff annually
A.C2
Containment
Property boundary adjacent to
Stanford and Portola Pastures
Not completed
A.C3 Containment Redtail Loop Area Not completed
A.C4
Containment
Property boundary adjacent to Paso
del Robles
Park Staff annually
A.C5 Containment Property boundary Laurel Glen - north Not completed
A.C6
Containment
Property boundary Laurel Glen -
south
Not completed
A.C7
Containment
Property boundary west of Meadow
Lark Trail
Not completed
A.C8
Containment
Property boundary adjacent to former
private research facility
Not completed
Final Draft
Page 11 of 36
Designation Project Description Source of Work Dates
Completed
A.C9
Containment
Property boundary adjacent to John
Marthens Lane
Park Staff annually
A.C10
Containment
Arastradero Creek (to Juan Bautista
trail)
Not completed
A.C11 Containment Meadow Lark to Juan Bautista Trail Park Staff annually
A.C12 Containment Meadow Lark south Not completed
A.C13 Containment Bowl Loop Trail Not completed
A.C14 Containment Arastradero to Rx fire area Park Staff Annually
A.C15 Containment Acorn Trail Not completed
A.Rx1 Containment Juan Bautista Prescribed fire north Fire Department 2013
A.Rx1 Containment Acorn Trail Prescribed fire south Not completed
Unmapped Treatment Areas
This update also captures areas not delineated in the 2009 FFMP but are regularly treated. These
consist of strips of land disked and mowed to create firebreaks.
The locations of these treatment areas previously unmapped are included in the map on the following
page:
Final Draft
Page 0 of 36
P.1o A.lto C.I,lor,... Appendix A Projects Completed s."".c~ .. COlX1t;'
,
'-
," J
!
, ,
-
.-
, '.
Final Draft
Page 0 of 36
APPENDIX B. New Treatments Areas and Activities
New Treatment Areas
There are six new treatment areas:
New Treatment Area #1 Area south of the Maintenance Yard in Foothills Park
PA1 Expanded The other side of Page Mill Road managed by MROSD
PA1 Expanded Work in the roadside right of ways (as contrasted with the fuelbreak off
the right of way)
New Treatment Area #2 Areas under and near powerlines on City land following Wild Horse Fire
Road (some has already been treated, some offset from treatment area)
New Treatment Area #3 Areas under and near powerlines on City land following Wild Horse Fire
Road (some has already been treated, some offset from treatment area)
Eucalyptus Grove #1, #2,
#3
Eucalyptus removal on upper Page Mill Rd.
New Treatment Area #5
and #6
Connection between Madrone Fire Trail, and Valley View Fire Rd and
Wild Horse Fire Road
Stanford Land Eucalyptus
Removal
Treat and otherwise address eucalyptus north and west of Atrastradero
Park because these fuels could be ember producer under north wind to
Palo Alto property. Options include thinning and removing the trees over
several years. The treatment area covers the stable, Ranch and Stanford
properties, within City limits.
The locations of these new treatment areas are shown on Map 2.
New Activities
Summary - In addition to new areas of treatment areas, a suite of new activities is recommended. Some
of the activities either are to be applied throughout the FCWPP area, some in the residential areas
within the FCWPP, and one is specific to along Los Trancos Road. These activities include:
1. Preparation of an application to become a FireWise Community,
2. An assessment of fuels (residential and wildland fuels)
3. Incorporation of the FCWPP into the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan and Comprehensive Plan, and
4. Increased collaboration on Los Trancos roadside treatments.
Firewise Community Application - The following are requirements to qualify as a Firewise Community:
1. Create an agreed-upon, area-specific action plan for the community, to be approved by the
California Firewise representative.
2. Hold a Home Ignition Zone Workshop to present the results of the assessment to the
homeowners and motivate them to become involved in project planning and participation in
a Firewise Board (or similar decision-making body).
3. Create an Action Plan that comprises the recommended steps homeowners can take to
increase the fire safety in their neighborhood, based on the assessment and willingness of
the homeowners. These will include at least three agreed-upon, doable action items that
will improve the site’s wildfire readiness
Final Draft
Page 1 of 36
4. Form a Firewise Board, which could be a subset of the MidPeninsula FireSafe Council, or
another existing organization serving the emergency preparedness needs of the
neighborhood.
5. Hold a Firewise Day event - an informative and social event of the neighborhood that
provides an opportunity to distribute material and build community spirit and pride. This
could be held in conjunction with a HOA annual meeting. The event could include a firewise
landscaping walking tour of the neighborhood, and a nursery demonstration or exhibit.
Alternatively, the event could include the cost of a crew to assist Juniper removal and
chipping during the day.
6. Invest a minimum of $2/capita in local wildfire mitigation projects. (Volunteer hours,
equipment use, time contributed by agency fire staff, and grant funding can be included)
7. Submit an application, working with a HOA representative.
8. Develop a Community Success Story, detailing the process, participants and activities will be
documented via photographs and short text so that the material can be posted on the City’s
website or other outlets (such as FireWise USA website).
Fuels Assessment – Part of the Firewise Application would include an assessment of vegetative and
structural fuels in the area encompassed by the application. In addition, wildland fuels analysis would
be characterized.
Including the FCWPP into the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan and Comprehensive Plan – It is recommended
that this update and the contents of the county-wide CWPP serve as the wildfire component of Palo Alto
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) and General Plan - Safety and other element amendments.
Los Trancos Roadside Treatments – This project is involves increased collaboration with Woodside Fire
Protection District, neighbors along Los Trancos Rd, and Santa Clara FireSafe Council to treat a wider
width of vegetation along Los Trancos Road (F.E6). The SCFSC will coordinate contractors to perform the
work along the road and perform outreach to encourage landowners to treat their land outside the City
right-of-way. The WFPD will provide dumpsters for the debris.
Final Draft
• P.1o A.lto C.I,lor,... Appendix B Recommended Projects s.,,".C~ .. COlX1t;'
/ j -----~
1
'-,
., ~
\
j
;~--.\,--, . . ~ , ---_ ..... . .... \.
". "
TrealmenlS
~ RecommeOOed Profects " u,
••
Final Draft
Page 3 of 36
APPENDIX C - Treatment Areas to be Abandoned or Revised
After 5 years of program implementation, a small number of treatment areas are
recommended to be abandoned or revised. This recommendation is due to the recognition of
redundancies in the program, changes in neighboring landownership, or refinements in
boundaries to ease implementation. The treatments areas that should be abandoned or
revised appear on Map 3.
All treatments to be abandoned or revised are located in Pearson-Arastradero Park
A.C6 revision (Part 1) - This area is mowed annually, and should be continued. This constitutes
the revised location, treatment and periodicity (in combination of the kmz AC6 revision Part 2).
A.C6 revision (Part 2) - This is a utility easement to be periodically maintained. It also serves as
a strategic containment location. Treatment need not be done annually, but instead, in a 3-5
year interval. The method of treatment would be either mechanical equipment or hand labor.
This, along with AC6 revision Part 1 (the area that is mowed annually) would replace AC6.
A.C8 revision-Mowing line#1 – A.C8 would not be treated with an area-wide treatment, but
instead be treated with a few strips of mowing with mechanical equipment. A new kmz documents
the first strip of mowing. The combination of all strips of mowing would substitute for A.C8.
Reduction of AC5 (refined notes) - This smaller area could be the new boundary for A.C5. Fuels are in
a low hazard condition in the area that is proposed to be abandoned. The remaining treatment area
could be treated with hand labor, with contract crews.
A.C 11 and A.C13 - These areas need not be mowed or disked annually because adjacent trails and
paths are maintained as firebreaks.
Final Draft
Page 4 of 36
A d" C P" b Ab d d P.1o A,I,o (.I,lor,... ppen IX rOJectsto e an one S,,""'{~"(OlX1t)'
f:" .. ,
!
\ •
/~ ",~' "
Treatments
Ell I ~om~~C Mnge~IA.CS &A.(61 -_ .... "
""' .... ~-... -... --...... -... -....
i I
... , ... --
f
\ ,
Final Draft
Page 0 of 36
APPENDIX D – Program Costs
Treatments are accomplished by efforts from both City staff and contractors. The City contracts directly
with one mechanical equipment service provider, and with the SCFSC. The list of areas treated by the
mechanical equipment service provider and the SCFSC appears in Table 1.
City Contributions - Staff from the City Community Services Department annually disk and mow
firebreaks, provide continuing outreach and education, and facilitate and coordinate equipment usage
by contractors (including the SCFSC). The cost of these treatments and activities are born by the CS
Department, and are not tracked as a cost to the FFMP/CWPP.
The treatment areas the City staff normally mow or disk are: A.C2, A.C3, A.C4, A.C7, A.C8, and A.C15.
Mechanical Equipment Service Contract – Every three years the City requests proposals and bids from
contractors to treat F.C1-5, and F.F1-4, on Trappers Trail. In addition, this contractor maintains fire
roads through annual grading of the roadbed surface. The current contract runs from 2015-2017 and
amounts to over $70,000. Significant cost increases were experienced in the cost of the contract and can
be expected to increase in 2017 by 20-30%.
Santa Clara County Firesafe Council (SCFSC) Contract – The City has provided the SCFSC with $50,000
for the FY 2013-2014, 2014-15 to perform work on City lands in order to promote implementation of
the FFMP/CWPP. In FY 2015-16 $60,000 was added in order to fund additional scopes of work, under
the agreed-upon work plan.
The SCFSC holds contracts with Project Coordinators who supervise CDCR crews (themselves under
contract to the SCFSC) and private contractors, and who perform education and outreach regarding fire
safety in the wildland urban interface.
Costs of the CDCR Crews are $300/day for a crew of 12-15 men and a van and CAL FIRE crew supervisor.
The daily cost for the FSC Project Coordinator is approximately $240/day. Costs are not expected to
increase significantly in the next 5 years, however crew availability is uncertain. The CDCR crews have
treated evacuation routes both inside and outside the parks, created defensible space and ignition
prevention spaces around barbecues within the parks, and treated many containment areas. The list of
areas treated with the CDCR crews appears in Table 1.
The highest treatment costs are experienced when private contractors perform the work. Private
contractors provide bids to perform services on areas where the use of the CDCR crews is not the best
match. These include locations where traffic control is required, where there is possible contact with
the public or where other safety concerns are present. Additionally, some locations require the type of
services the CDCR crews cannot provide (i.e. mowing or grading). The costs for simply mowing grass
along Arastradero Rd. (A.E1) was $8,800 in 2016, for example, whereas the cost for treating the same
area was $7,540 in 2015, with $2,140 in private contractor cost (for traffic control) and approximately
$5,400 for 10 days of work to but brush and trim trees. Costs of private contractors is expected to
increase each year, based on increased labor and operating costs.
Final Draft
Page 1 of 36
The SCFSC has and potentially will continue to augment funds from the City with grants or funds from
partners. For example, $43,000 from PG&E is allocated in FY 2016-17 for work within 1000-ft of
powerlines along upper Page Mill Road. Similarly, partnerships with MROSD are expected to result in the
removal and/or treatment of eucalyptus groves in upper Page Mill Road on MROSD lands within the City.
The South Skyline Firesafe Council treated portions of Skyline Road within the City. Similar partnerships
can be expected to benefit the City in the next five years.
Table 1. Entity Responsible for Treatment
TREATMENT
AREAS INSIDE
PARKS
Poly #
Project Title
Location
Work to be performed
by Whom?
F.F1
Firefighter
Safety Zone 1
Trappers Ridge & Los
Trancos Trail
Mowing contractor
F.F2
Firefighter
Safety Zone 2
Trappers Ridge & Madron Fire
Road
Mowing contractor
F.F3
Firefighter
Safety Zone 3
Trappers Ridge high point
Mowing contractor
F.F4
Firefighter
Safety Zone 4
Trapper Ridge south end
Mowing contractor
Foothill
F.E2
Evacuation
Route - Park
Road
Entrance to Maintenance Yard
Las Trampas Valley
SCFSC
F.E3
Evacuation
Route - Park
North west
Interpretive Center to
Hewlett property
SCFSC
F.E4
Evacuation
Route - Park
North east
Boranda Lake to Alexis Drive
SCFSC
F.E5
Secondary
Evac Route
Towle Campground to Las
Trampas Valley
SCFSC
F.C1 Containment Trappers Trail Mowing contractor
F.C2
Containment
Pony Tracks south of
Trappers Ridge
Mowing contractor
F.C3
Containment
Pony Tracks north of
Trappers Ridge
Mowing contractor
F.C4 Containment Bobcat point Mowing contractor
F.C5 Containment North of entry Gate Mowing contractor
Valley View Fire Trail Mowing contractor
PA.3 Los Trancos
Road
Los Trancos Rd
SCFSC
F.D.1 Defensible
Space
Entry Gate
SCFSC
Final Draft
Page 2 of 36
Poly #
Project Title
Location
Work to be performed
by Whom?
F.D.2 Defensible
Space
Station 8
SCFSC
F.D.3 Defensible
Space
Restrooms at Glen
SCFSC
F.D.4 Defensible
Space
Interpretive Center
SCFSC
F.D.5 Defensible
Space
Maintenance Complex
SCFSC
F.D.6 Defensible
Space
Pumping Station at
Campground
SCFSC
F.D.7 Defensible
Space
Pony Tracks Water Tank
SCFSC
F.D.8 Defensible
Space
Page Mill Road Water Tank
SCFSC
F.D.9 Defensible
Space
Page Mill Road Water Tank
SCFSC
F.I.1 Ignition
Prevention
Woodrat picnic area
SCFSC
F.I.2 Ignition
Prevention
Roadside picnic area
SCFSC
F.I.3 Ignition
Prevention
Orchard Glen north
SCFSC
F.I.4 Ignition
Prevention
Orchard Glen south
SCFSC
F.I.5 Ignition
Prevention
Group Campsite
SCFSC
F.I.6 Ignition
Prevention
Campground
SCFSC
Pearson Arastradero
A.C1
Containment Property boundary
adjacent to Lidicott
SCFSC
A.C4
Containment
Property boundary
adjacent to Paso del
Robles
SCFSC
A.C5
Containment Property boundary Laurel Glen
- north
SCFSC
A.C6
Containment Property boundary Laurel Glen
- south
SCFSC
A.C9
Containment Property boundary adjacent to
John Marthens
SCFSC
A.C10
Containment
Arasterdero Creek (to
Juan Bautista trail)
Part of prescribed fire
preparation
Final Draft
Page 3 of 36
Poly #
Project Title
Location
Work to be performed
by Whom?
A.C11
Containment
Meadow Lark to Juan
Bautista Trail
Part of prescribed fire
preparation
A.C14
Containment
Arastradero to Rx fire area
Part of prescribed fire
preparation
A.C15
Containment
Acorn Trail
Part of prescribed fire
preparation
A.D1 Defensible Space Interpretive Center SCFSC
A.D3 Defensible Space Pumping Station SCFSC
A.D4 Defensible Space Water Tank SCFSC
Grading fire
roads
Mowing contractor
Costs of New Treatment Areas – The new treatment areas are not expected to be a significant new cost
because these costs should be borne by outside funding sources. The removal of eucalyptus groves on
Upper Page Mill Road will be funded by either PG&E or MROSD. There will be minor amounts of
administrative costs from the City. Similarly, the treatment of the eucalyptus on Stanford lands would
be borne by Stanford or leases of the land, or potentially through grant funding. The recommended new
treatment areas within Foothills Park is anticipated to be completed through the SCFSC, with CDCR
crews. Based an estimated daily cost of $540/day, and an estimated need for 15 days of work to
accomplish the scope, the work is expected to cost $8,100.
Time-stream of costs – The time stream of costs can be expected to rise incrementally, based on an
increase in private contractor costs, and balanced by the increased area that need only be maintained
(as compared with initial treatment or deferred maintenance). Funds can be augmented through
collaboration with partners, a continued relationship with SCFSC, and grant funding.
Final Draft
Wildland Res Mgt Palo Alto
FlamMap Results Technical Report
Appendix E
Technical Report:
FlamMap Fire Behavior Results for Palo Alto
Digital Mapping Solutions November 14, 2016
Final Draft
Wildland Res Mgt
Palo Alto
FlamMap Results Technical Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1: Data Preparation 1
Section 2: Fire Behavior Parameters 2
Section 3: Pre Conditions Results 3
Section 4: Post Conditions Results 4
Section 5: Notes/Observations 5
Foothills Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Final Draft
Update
Foothills Community Wildfire Protection Plan Update
Final Draft
Wildland Res Mgt Palo Alto
FlamMap Results Technical Report 1
SECTION 1 – DATA PREPARATION
I~I OMS
Foothills Community Wildfire Protection Plan Update
Final Draft
Wildland Res Mgt Palo Alto
FlamMap Results Technical Report 2
Eight data layers were downloaded using LANDFIRE’s ArcMap using the LANDFIRE Data Access
Tool. The following list details the version and attribute definitions for each layer:
1. Fuel Models – FBFM13 (LANDFIRE version 130). Thirteen typical surface fuel
arrangements or "collections of fuel properties" (Anderson 1982) were described to
serve as input for Rothermel's mathematical surface fire behavior and spread model
(Rothermel 1972).
2. Canopy Cover – Described by percent cover of tree canopy in a stand.
3. Canopy Height – Described as the average height of the top of the canopy for a
stand. Reported in meters * 10.
4. Canopy Base Height – Described by the lowest point in a stand where there is
sufficient available fuel (0.25 in dia.) to propagate fire vertically through the canopy.
Reported in meters * 10.
5. Canopy Base Density – Defined as the mass of available canopy fuel per unit canopy
volume that would burn in a crown fire. Reported in kg/m3*100.
6. Elevation – Described in meters.
7. Slope – Described in degrees (0 – 90).
8. Aspect – Described I degrees (0-259).
From these layers, a pre-fuel modification fire behavior landscape file was created and named
Palo Alto_PRE.lcp. The extents of the LCP are as follows:
• North: 37.407735 degrees latitude
• South: 37.295132 degrees latitude
• West: -122.2478 degrees longitude
• East: -122.1164 degrees longitude
Foothills Community Wildfire Protection Plan Update
Final Draft
Wildland Res Mgt Palo Alto
FlamMap Results Technical Report 3
SECTION 1.1 – DATA MODIFICATIONS
Within the treatment areas, fuel models were changed in the
following way:
• Grassy fuels (FM1 & FM3) were converted to a custom
fuel model FM23 that represented mowed grass. Specific
parameters for FM23 are included below.
• Shrub fuels (FM4, FM5, FM6) were also
converted to FM23.
• Hardwood fuels (FM9 & FM10) were converted to FM8.
Within the treatment areas, the canopy base height changed in
the following way:
• If canopy base height was lower than 8 feet (2.4384 meters or 24 meters*10), then
canopy base height was changed to 24 meters*10.
• If canopy base height was higher than 8 feet (2.4384 meters or 24 meters*10),
then no changes were made.
The changes were completed in ArcMap using standard GIS processing methods. The custom
fuel model (FM23) was defined as follows:
Fuel Model Number 23
Fuel Model Code FM23
1hr Fuel Loading (tons/acre) 0.300
10hr Fuel Loading (tons/acre) 0.000
100hr Fuel Loading (tons/acre) 0.000
Live Herbaceous Fuel Loading
(tons/acre)
0.000
Live Woody Fuel Loading (tons/acre) 0.000
Fuel Model Type Static
Foothills Community Wildfire Protection Plan Update
Final Draft
Wildland Res Mgt Palo Alto
FlamMap Results Technical Report 4
1hr Surface to Volume Ratio 3500
Live Herbaceous Surface to Volume Ratio 500
Live Woody Surface to Volume Ratio 500
Depth (feet) 0.500
Moisture of Extinction (percent) 11
Dead Heat Content (BTU/lb) 8000
Live Heat Content (BTU/lb) 8000
Fuel Model Name Mowed Treatments
This fuel model definition is provided in a text file name ‘FM23.fmd’.
Foothills Community Wildfire Protection Plan Update
Final Draft
Wildland Res Mgt Palo Alto
FlamMap Results Technical Report 5
SECTION 2 – FIRE BEHAVIOR PARAMETERS
I~I OMS
~"n;!l<yCoodill<>n> _1 .... __ I __ t_lr ___ 1
~-~ .... __ ... r>ooj. 1i _____ .J.7-1<>IIl_-.JIEI
,ruooc-_r .... j ..J!I -r__ _ __ .3Pl~
,,-__ """'--_fiii""""::I r __ _
"-~-I r __ ....
-I ---1 -I --1 --_ f'3 ","""aA~"'P'""'3 ......... __ P""3 _-""'-N fiO'3
~:::.':::...--.... -...
............... lOKl .... r::====== '":::;.:: :-:jl r .... __
....... r_ i ..JiI
.... -~-~ ,--~~ "'~I" .. "''''' ,--~-.... -
........ -_I_'_t_I' ____ 1 --_ .. -.-:a -,--"' ..... -._-r_,,,,,,_ r __ _
17,,-,,"_
r"-'_ ...... _ .... _-, , , , ,
,--r ... __
r ...... ~ r __ _
r ....... _ r __ _
_-" 1 __ ... 1 -,,-----r ____ _ -,---"
Foothills Community Wildfire Protection Plan Update
Final Draft
Wildland Res Mgt Palo Alto
FlamMap Results Technical Report 6
Using FlamMap to predict fire behavior across the entire landscape, we chose to model fire
under extreme dry weather conditions.
For all fuel models, we set our fuel moistures (in percent) to the following:
1hr fuels 3
10hr fuels 4
100hr fuels 5
Live herbaceous 70
Live woody 70
Filename: 3-4-5-70-70.fms.
Wind was set to ‘Wind Blowing Uphill’ at a speed of 20mph. Foliar Moisture Content was set to
70% and no conditioning weather or wind files were used.
Outputs included Rate of Spread, Flame Length, and Crown Fire Activity using the
Scott/Reinhardt (2001) option under the Crown Fire Calculation Method. We used the default
for the ‘Options’ parameter (Relative Spread Direction From Maximum).
Both the pre- and post-fuel modification runs used the parameters above. The only exception
is that for the post-fuel modification fire model run, we used the Custom Fuels file FM23.fmd
(as described in the previous section).
Foothills Community Wildfire Protection Plan Update
Final Draft
Wildland Res Mgt Palo
Alto
FlamMap Results Technical Report
SECTION 3: PRE CONDITIONS RESULTS
7
Flame Length Results –
Pre Fuel Modifications
Rate of Spread – Pre-Fuel
Modifications
Crown Fire Potential –
Pre-Fuel Modifications
Foothills Community Wildfire Protection Plan Update
Final Draft
Wildland Res Mgt Palo Alto
FlamMap Results Technical Report 8
Only three outputs were generated, however, more can easily be added. However, we focused
on Flame Length, Rate of Spread and Crown Fire Potential as these are easily understandable.
FLAME LENGTH
Under these conditions, the landscape surrounding the fuel modification sites burn at what
would be described as “extreme” fire behavior. Flame lengths reach far into the canopy. Mean
flame lengths across the entire landscape are 40 feet, with a maximum of 213 feet. There is very
little in the landscape that does not burn.
RATE OF SPREAD
Rate of spread shows a similar trend with mean spread rates of 89 chains/hr (or 5,874 ft/hr)
with a maximum of 634 chains/hr (or approximately 8 miles/hr).
CROWN FIRE POTENTIAL
Given such conditions, torching and crowning is inevitable, as shown in the results. Active
torching and crowning is expected where ever trees are.
Foothills Community Wildfire Protection Plan Update
Final Draft
Wildland Res Mgt Palo
Alto
FlamMap Results Technical Report
SECTION 4: POST CONDITIONS RESULTS
9
Flame Length Results –
Post Fuel Modifications
Rate of Spread – Post-
Fuel Modifications
Crown Fire Potential –
Post Fuel Modifications
Foothills Community Wildfire Protection Plan Update
Final Draft
Wildland Res Mgt Palo Alto
FlamMap Results Technical Report 10
Again, three outputs were generated. Some details provided below.
FLAME LENGTH
Under these fuel moisture conditions, even after applying the fuel modification measures, the
landscape surrounding the fuel modification sites still burned at what would be described as
“extreme” fire behavior. Flame lengths reach far into the canopy. Mean flame lengths across
the entire landscape are 40 feet, with a maximum of 213 feet. There is very little in the
landscape that does not burn.
In the immediate area of the larger fuel modification sites, flames lengths were reduced from 9
feet to 2 feet.
RATE OF SPREAD
The mean for rate of spread was reduced from 89 chains/hour to 88 chains/hour with a
maximum of 634 chains/hr (or approximately 8 miles/hr).
In the immediate area of the larger fuel modification sites, rate of spread was reduced from
301 chains/hr to 47 chains/hr.
CROWN FIRE POTENTIAL
Crown fire potential remained the same since most of the fuel treatments that targeted
canopy base height were done in very narrow fuel treatments.
Foothills Community Wildfire Protection Plan Update
Final Draft
Wildland Res Mgt Palo Alto
FlamMap Results Technical Report 11
SECTION 5: NOTES/OBSERVATIONS
IC§I OMS
Foothills Community Wildfire Protection Plan Update
Final Draft
Wildland Res Mgt Palo Alto
FlamMap Results Technical Report 12
Over all, the fuel modifications had local impact on modeled fire behavior. However, fire
behavior remains unchanged on a larger scale. This indicates that targeted treatments affect
strategic areas, providing localized safe areas for evacuation, firefighter safety during wildfires,
and fire containment in an area of high fire hazard.
For most of the fuel modification projects, the treatments were confined to very narrow
corridors, and were possibly under-represented in the results. This was due to:
1. The underlying data, which has a resolution of 30 meters or 98 feet. Some fuel
modifications locations were lost when translated from a vector based file to a raster.
2. Even when the fuel modification ported over to the raster, it affected too few pixels
to have a noticeable impact on fire behavior.
Larger fuel breaks would be captured in the model more easily and have great impact on
fire behavior. Additionally, higher resolution data would more accurately portray the
benefits of fuel management.
Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Annex 7 – Palo Alto (including Stanford University)
SWCA Environmental Consultants 1 June 2016
ANNEX 7. PALO ALTO (INCLUDING STANFORD
UNIVERSITY)
Palo Alto is located in the northwest corner of Santa Clara County and shares it border with East
Palo Alto, Mountain View, Los Altos Hills, Stanford, Portola Valley and Menlo Park (Figure 7.1). As of the 2010 Census, the city total resident population was 64,403 with a population density of
2,497.5 people per square mile.
Stanford is a census-designated place in the County and the home to Stanford University. The
population as of the 2010 Census was 13,809, but with a daily population of 35,000.
ORGANIZATION AND JURISDICTION
Fire management for the City of Palo Alto is provided by the Palo Alto Fire Department.
The City of Palo Alto developed a Foothills Fire Management Plan (FFMP) in 1982 that provides
the planning framework for fire control activities for the City and the Palo Alto Foothills Area
which comprises the predominant wildland urban interface (WUI) area for the community. The
FFMP goal is “to reduce government costs and citizen losses from wildland fire by increasing initial attack success and/or protecting assets at risk through focused pre-fire management activities.” The 2009 update addresses changes to the fire hazard assessment, review regional
evacuation routes, review municipal ordinances, staffing of Station 8 (Foothills Fire Station),
provide wildland fire management recommendations and mitigations, incorporate updates to open
space plans, implement CEQA documentation, and create an implementation plan.
In 2012 the city entered into a multi-year agreement with the Santa Clara FireSafe Council to facilitate the implementation of the FFMP and to provide additional community education and
outreach to the residents of the WUI area within the city.
Another update is being prepared; the areas recommended for treatment are incorporated into this
Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) and will appear on the City website.
PLANNING TEAM PARTICIPATION
Carol Rice of Wildland Resource Management Inc. authored the 2009 update to the Palo Alto
FFMP. Ms. Rice is part of the planning team for the Santa Clara County Community Wildfire
Protection Plan (SCCCWPP) and due to her continued engagement in fire planning for Palo Alto,
she serves as a Core Team member representing the Palo Alto community.
SUMMARY
Palo Alto contains WUI areas and is on the Federal and/or California Fire Alliance list of
Communities at Risk from wildfires in Santa Clara County.
Wildfires occur in the vicinity of Palo Alto and present a danger to people and properties within
the city.
Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Annex 7 – Palo Alto (including Stanford University)
SWCA Environmental Consultants 2 June 2016
Mitigations can reduce the risk of injury and damage. Some mitigations are solely the
responsibility of property owners, other mitigations require neighborhood-level action, and some require city government action.
In the Fire Management program update for the Foothills, a review of the fire hazards, mitigation
activities, and environmental considerations for the area led to recommendations for wildland fuels
and fire management.
SWCA Environmental Consultants 3 June 2016
Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Annex 7 – Palo Alto (including Stanford University)
Figure 7.1. Palo Alto Planning Area
..
Palo Alto
Planning Area
Community Wildfire
Protection Plan
Santa Clara County, California o Place D Lake or
• Fire Station Walerbody
[7"7'A Protected • School lLLJArea
Fire ~ Airport
[8] Hospital D Protection
District
[IJ Cell Tower CALFIRE
--Highway FHSZ
Moderate --Street
High --+--Railroad
D county • Very High
Adopted Planning City FHSZ Areas B:,-wu, !QQlHi9h
Santa Clara Cou"nty/ N
A
Miles
0.5 1 - ----
Kilometers o 0.5 1
~--1 :70,000
SWCA
Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Annex 7 – Palo Alto (including Stanford University)
SWCA Environmental Consultants 4 June 2016
The Foothills Fire Management Plan addresses a broad range of integrated activities and planning
documents to address and mitigate the impacts of fire hazards in the area west of Foothills Expressway to the city limits of Palo Alto. Fire mitigation project areas include Foothills Park and
Pearson-Arastradero Preserve.
The full plan can be downloaded at the following path:
http://www.sccfiresafe.org/images/attachments/community-wildfire-protection-
plans/Palo_Alto_FFMP_Final.pdf
The SCCCWPP establishes strategic goals for these more detailed community level fire-planning
efforts. The Palo Alto FFMP is incorporated into this county (multi-jurisdictional) planning
process through reference, but remains the most detailed level plan for Palo Alto.
WUI AREA DESCRIPTION
The Palo Alto Fire Code defines the Wildland Urban Interface Fire Area as: “…all areas west of Highway 280 and all other areas recommended as ‘Very High fire Hazard Severity Zone’ by the director of CAL FIRE.” (Section 15.04.520). The WUI consists of a mix of urban, semi-urban and
open space lands on the eastern slope of the Santa Cruz Mountains. Within the city limits of Palo
Alto, the Palo Alto Foothills area west of the Foothills Expressway and Junipero Serra Boulevard
represents a WUI area. The Palo Alto Foothills Area includes two city-managed areas: Foothills Park and the Pearson-Arastradero Preserve.
FIRE HISTORY
The fire history is relatively free of major events in recent decades. The last major fire in the
vicinity of the upper foothills was in 1912. Significant fires in the lower foothills (primarily light fuels) occurred in 1985, 1992, 2000 and 2007.
HAZARDOUS FUEL CONDITIONS
Fuels found throughout the planning area are extremely varied. Figure 7.2 through Figure 7.5
illustrate the fuel types and potential fire behavior as determined during the 2009 Palo Alto FFMP update.
Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Annex 7 – Palo Alto (including Stanford University)
SWCA Environmental Consultants 5 June 2016
Figure 7.2. Palo Alto Fuels, as developed during the 2009 FFMP Update
12 NClll$lTlc .... 2008
_.
>~ -$"".0. Fu.la D 'G.m
• 20-'Sav3ma
• ~ CtoIIpln1
• 5 N01JI Wlll:l1.,,<Ib -. ,-" ....... _ ..
• , M.e~ ~Itrnt .,0 _000 D lBUfD..,
D·~ D o_
D 999a"<!f'
GIS o.n· ''''" '" ~.Io"'''o
SIftl •• 'IMIO,UIOUf<. '''''om!. 0.,_." 01 '''''''IV .na ",a ~rot_on
O.CL..I.IMI!I'l:T .... II ••• C""",nI.lntl,," Oop_..,IOI'",.IIV .. " ... ~_lOn m.~. no ...... .,mlonl o. w ..... I ........ ng "" ....... , .Id ... "' m"l'l. TM ..... W ... "", .. ....
l1> .... a .,. II.,. Of .,. 0., ....... 110lil ...... .. .. '.I ...... " ...... t .................. w ..... ,..1
", ... ,cI.II"1rj .,.u_o,any_p.ttyOR
... ouN 01 ..... ".ing"", "'" .... Of cI>IO or "'fI'I.
Palo Alto
Surface Fuels
Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Annex 7 – Palo Alto (including Stanford University)
SWCA Environmental Consultants 6 June 2016
Figure 7.3. Crown Fire and Torching Potential, as developed during the 2009 FFMP Update
12 November 2008
" .. llvo Crown Fir. (torching)
_ A,liu Crown fire
D ...... on .... r .. tr.doro 1' ......... D FoothHI. Pari<
TnlJI,
ROld,
AnllYII, by: Wlldllnd R .. ourci M.nlglmlnt In,
ullng FLAMMAP wilt. dll. P<'9vldld by:
GIS 0", So...-.:o: City of 1',10 Allo
Ground veriflc.tlon: Plio Alto City SUI! en. Dot.: LANDFIRE ancl
Crown Fire and Torching Potential
Deyils Canyon
Rancho San AnIOIJio
O~nSpac~
CaUfornla Oep_l1m,nt of Fo .. ,try _nd Firt Prol,cdon
"'';'!~~ __ ~==~~_~",,==:,Mikls O~ 0.2 0.4 0,8 1.2 1,6
PAlOALTO.CA
Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Annex 7 – Palo Alto (including Stanford University)
SWCA Environmental Consultants 7 June 2016
Figure 7.4. Predicted Flame Length, as developed during the 2009 FFMP Update.
12 November 2008
Predicted Flame Length
~"!"\I
.0.NOFIreSP .... d
.0.4
0 4•8
0 '·12
.12-20
• 2:1 .nd high., D PU,"on.,ArIIltr..:l .. O P ..... rv. o Foothills F'.rt<
_ Trllill
--Ro..:l,
An.IYIII by: Wildllnd RllourCI M.n'glmlnt Inc
ullng FLAMMAP wilt> d.tl P<9vldld by:
GIS O.t. 50"'"0: City of P.lo Allo
Ground veriflc.tlon: Plio Allo City SUII
B ... DIU: LANOFIRE .nd
Predicted Flame Length
Deyils Canyon
Rancho San AnIOIJio
O~nSpac~
CIUfomh Otp."mt nt of Fort'try .nd Fir, Proltcdon
"'';'!~~ __ ~==~~_~",,==:,Miles O~ 0.2 0.4 0,8 1.2 1,6
PAlOALTO.CA
Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Annex 7 – Palo Alto (including Stanford University)
SWCA Environmental Consultants 8 June 2016
Figure 7.5. Predicted Rate of Spread, as developed during the 2009 FFMP Update
12 November 2008
MO leel
2640 (1/2 mile)
_ 26<11·5280 ll molol
_ Ita4mi1es
o Pearson-Anostndera P~serve o FOOlhMI.PII1I
Tnll.
Raads
AnalYIII: Wildland Rnauret Managlmlnt. Inc
ullng FLAM MAP wlltl dl" prov'dld by:
GIS Olt' SOurel: City ar P"o Alto
Ground vtlineatlan: Plla Alta City St.ff
Bne O.t.: LAtUIRE Ind Califomi. Department of Foru by and
Fire Protection
Predicted Rate of Spread
Devils Canyon
Rancho Sail Amoll/o OpellSpace
_~-=~ __ !",==~ __ -::=="Milts
0.4 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6
P1<lOAlTO.CA
Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Annex 7 – Palo Alto (including Stanford University)
SWCA Environmental Consultants 9 June 2016
NEIGHBORHOOD AND STRUCTURAL CHARACTERISTICS
The Palo Alto community is made up of a mixture of homes with both old and new construction.
Many homes are compliant with Building Code Chapter 7A, having been built since the WUI
ordinance went into effect. Siding is a mixture of stucco and wood. Most homes have Class A
roofs however there are enough with wood-shake roofs to endanger an entire neighborhood. Most
roads are surfaced and have adequate width and turnaround for emergency apparatus. Roads are not very steep in most locations, but short stretches may be 10% grade.
Home lot size is large enough to separate homes enough to limit ignition from radiant heat (if the
vegetation is managed between and surrounding the homes). Adjacent wildlands to the west and
north are grass and are managed every year by the City of Palo Alto.
Water supply for the WUI areas is adequate and provided via hydrants connected to the city water supply.
There is an organized HOA for much of the Foothills area that is active in fire prevention and can
deliver a strong fire safety message and take action.
EMERGENCY RESPONSE CAPACITY
Approximately 200 residences and large business complexes (some of them exceeding a million square feet in area) are located in Palo Alto’s Wildland Urban Interface Fire Area. The City of Palo Alto Emergency Operations Plan (June 2007) notes that 11 health care facilities, 10 schools
and 25 government-owned buildings are located in the wildland urban interface threat areas, along
with 19 miles of roadway that are subject to high, very high or extreme wild fire threat. The fire department has 122 personnel organized in three areas: Emergency Response (Operations), Environmental and Safety Management (Fire Prevention Bureau), Training and Personnel
Management (Support).
The Fire Department staffs six full-time stations located strategically throughout the city. To provide coverage in the sparsely developed hillside areas, an additional fire station in the foothills is operated during summer months when fire danger is high.
PUBLIC EDUCATION AND OUTREACH PROGRAMS
The city has a strong online presence where City fire prevention messages inform their residents,
with a particular webpage that address threats and hazards. This is found at
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/services/public_safety/plans_and_information/thira.asp.
In addition, there is an annual outreach by the city fire department in conjunction with inspection of parcels. Additionally, representatives from the Santa Clara FireSafe Council and the City
Office of Emergency Services annually host a disaster preparedness workshop for the WUI area
that includes wildland fire.
The City works collaboratively with its partners and neighbors. The City contracts with the Santa Clara Fire Safe Council to assist with community outreach and education, as well as hazardous
Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Annex 7 – Palo Alto (including Stanford University)
SWCA Environmental Consultants 10 June 2016
fuel reduction projects in the WUI. Representatives from the Santa Clara County Fire Safe Council
augments public education material and often makes direct contact with homeowners. For example, a recent roadside treatment project on the Sam Mateo border was a partnership between
the city, the SCFSC, and the Woodside Fire Protection District (WFPD), with the SCFSC
facilitating contact of residents to encourage removal of vegetation beyond the road right of way.
Several dumpsters (provided by WFPD) were filled and evacuation ease improved.
The City has committed to the goal of having neighborhoods in the foothills become a designated Firewise community. They are sponsoring a fuels assessment of the community and support the
application.
POLICIES, REGULATIONS, ORDINANCES, CODES
The FFMP includes details of codes and ordinances, as well as the code documents to which they
refer.
FIRE CODE
Title 15 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code adopted the California Fire Code, 2013 Edition, with
local amendments.
In addition, Title 8 regulates water efficiency, which affects defensible space and weed abatement; this is found at http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/utl/residents/resrebate/landscape.asp.
BUILDING CODE
Title 16 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code adopted the California Building Code, 2013 Edition. In
general these sections support the adopted Title 15 Fire Code.
HAZARD ASSESSMENT
Community hazard assessments include ratings of community conditions compared to best practices for WUI fire mitigation. Community hazard ratings include consideration of applicable
state codes, local ordinances, and recognized best practices guidelines.
The National Fire Protection Association Standard 1144 (NFPA 1144) defines WUI hazards and
risks at the community and parcel level. This plan utilizes components of NFPA 1144, California laws and local ordinances to evaluate neighborhood WUI hazard and risk. California Public
Resources Code (PRC) 4290 and 4291 sections address WUI community design and defensible
space standards.
The NFPA 1144 community risk assessment completed as part of this SCCCWPP for the Palo
Alto Community assigned the WUI community a risk rating of High with a score of 103 (<40= low, >40 = moderate, >70 = High, >112 = Extreme). Factors that contributed to the risk are
illustrated below. Averages are taken across the community for each of these parameters.
In addition to the on-the-ground hazard assessment, the CWPP also includes a Composite Fire
Risk/Hazard Assessment which uses fire behavior modelling to determine potential fire behavior
Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Annex 7 – Palo Alto (including Stanford University)
SWCA Environmental Consultants 11 June 2016
and is based on fuel characteristics, topography, weather and fire history. The Composite
Risk/Hazard Assessment for the planning area is shown in Figure 7.6. For more information on the methodology for this assessment please refer to Section 4.6.1 in Chapter 4 of the SCCCWPP.
Parameter Condition Rating
Access One road in and out -
Good road width and minimal grade +
Surfaced road +
Good fire access and turnarounds +
Street signs are present, some are non-reflective +/-
Vegetation Adjacent Fuels: Heavy -
Defensible Space: Less than 30 feet around structure -
Topography within 300 feet of structure 10% to 20% +/-
Topographic features Moderate concern +/-
History of high fire occurrence Low +
Severe fire weather potential Low +
Separation of adjacent structures Good separation +
Roofing Assembly* Class C -
Building Construction Non-combustible siding/combustible deck +/-
Building set back <30 feet to slope -
Available Fire Protection Water: hydrants present with good pressure +
Response: Station <5 miles from structure +
Internal sprinklers: none -
Utilities One above and one below ground +/- *Roofing assembly: Class A: effective against severe fire test exposures; Class B: effective against moderate fire test exposures; Class C: effective against light fire test exposures; Unrated (wood shake roofs).
NOTE: Stanford University had similar WUI features to Palo Alto, however its rating score was much reduced due to increased defensible space around structures and lighter adjacent fuels in
interface areas.
SWCA Environmental Consultants 12 June 2016
Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Annex 7 – Palo Alto (including Stanford University)
Figure 7.6. Composite Fire Risk/Hazard Assessment for Palo Alto
Palo Alto
Planning Area
Risk Assessment
Community Wildfire
Protection Plan
Santa Clara County, California
o Place D county
• Fire Station D Lake or
• School VValerbody
Airport Risk
Assessment
Low
Moderate
High
_Extreme
Miles o 0_25 0_5 &--
Kilometers o 0.5 1 P"'WIw.--
SWCA
SWCA Environmental Consultants 13 June 2016
Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Annex 7 – Palo Alto (including Stanford University)
PARCEL LEVEL RISK ASSESSMENT
A model for determining parcel level risk and effect of mitigations is available through this CWPP
project. The model uses information available through public record for basic analysis but can be further refined with a site visit with the property owner for a thorough analysis of risk score. The property owner can then use this analysis to determine most effective steps they can take to reduce
their risk.
IDENTIFY CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY
VALUES AT RISK
The SCCCWPP identifies critical infrastructure as: fire departments, emergency shelters, hospitals, schools, communications sites, electrical distribution, and other critical service facilities
The SCCCWPP identifies the following community values at risk for Palo Alto WUI areas:
• City of Palo Alto Station 8, in Foothills Park
• Open space areas: Mid-Peninsula Open Space District and Stanford University
• Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve
• Private residences
• Private recreation facilities like equestrian centers and Palo Alto Hills Golf and Country Club
• The site of private research facility (the Palo Alto University)
• Unique wildland habitat capable of supporting a mix of wildlife, a diverse plant and
wildlife population containing several protected and monitored species, and a mix of ecosystems ranging from riparian areas to serpentine soils.
• The FFMP lists (in figure 11, page 32) sensitive species known or potentially occurring in the WUI area
MITIGATION PROJECTS AND PRIORITIZATIONS
The following project matrices have been developed by the community and Core Team to direct specific project implementation for communities in the Palo Alto WUI (Table 7.1-Table 7.3). The
matrices below are tiered to the strategic goals presented in the body of the SCCCWPP through
project IDs in the first column of each matrix. The matrices are broken down into projects for
addressing hazardous fuels, structural ignitability and public education and outreach.
NOTE: Please review the KMLs for the planning area for spatially delineated conceptual
projects to be incorporated into the annex following review.
Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Annex 7 – Palo Alto (including Stanford University)
SWCA Environmental Consultants 14 June 2016
Table 7.1. Recommendations for Public Outreach and Education for Palo Alto
ID Project Presented by Target Date Priority
(1,2,3) Resources Needed Serves to
Strategic Goal: EO13-Implement Firewise Communities programs.
Work with communities to participate in Firewise Communities and prepare for fire events. Hold Firewise booths at local events for example during the October Fire
Awareness Week each year.
PA- EO13.1 Support
designation of the
Foothills neighborhood as
Firewise
Establish and support a new
Firewise Communities.
Neighborhood fuels
assessment, application to
Firewise.
Palo Alto Fire
Department,
Alexsis Drive HOA,
SCFSC.
2016 Staff hours to facilitate and
support, addition to
SCFSC work plan.
Give residents ownership of the fire
problem, provide resources and
information necessary to inform and
prepare the community for fire.
Table 7.2. Recommendations for Reducing Structural Ignitability for Palo Alto
ID Project Presented by Programs Available Description Contact Priority (1,2,3) /Date
Strategic Goal: SI4- Adopt common defensible space standards throughout the county.
PA –SI4.1 Continue defensible space
maintenance around all City structures and water tanks in
City-owned parcels
Community Services
Department and Fire
Department
none Use hand labor to maintain defensible
space and serve as a model for
residents in the WUI of Palo Alto.
Community
Services Department and
Fire Department
H/annually
PA SI4.2 Continue to contract with
Santa Clara FireSafe Council
to assist with community
outreach and education
Foothills Community
Wildfire Management
Program Team
City fire prevention
material, Firewise,
Ready-Set-Go,
SCFSC Living with
Fire
Offer hands-on workshops to highlight
individual home vulnerabilities and how-
to techniques to reduce ignitability of
common structural elements.
Regional Fire Marshals.
H/annually
PA SI4.3 Continue annual inspections
of defensible space by fire
department.
Local Fire Marshal City fire department
material, County
Weed abatement
“app”
Fire Marshal,
Fire department
personnel
H/annually
Strategic Goal: SI7- Promote Firewise Community recognition program countywide; consider SCL amendments to Fire wise; partner with CERT and Neighborhood
Watch. NOTE: Linked to EO 13
PA-SI7.1 Support designation of the Foothills neighborhood as
Firewise
Fire department, NFPA Firewise Assist in neighborhood fuels
assessment, application to Firewise.
Fire Marshal H/2016
Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Annex 7 – Palo Alto (including Stanford University)
SWCA Environmental Consultants 15 June 2016
Table 7.3. Fuel Reduction Treatment Recommendations for Palo Alto
ID Project Description Location and
Responsible Party Method Serves to: Timeline for Action Priority
(1,2,3) Monitoring Resources/funding
sources available
Strategic Goal: FR7: Develop roadside fuel treatment program, including suite of methods available and sustainability mechanism.
PA-
FR7.1
Roadside and
Driveway Fuel
Modification for Safe
Access and Egress
Within road right of way
and within City-owned
parks, on Page Mill
Rd., Los Trancos Rd., Arastradero Rd, Skyline
Blvd., and within
Pearson-Arasterdero
and Foothills Park.
Hand labor,
mechanized
mowers, grazing
livestock.
Allow safe
passage for
evacuation and
emergency access.
Mow grass annually,
3-5 year tree trimming
and brush removal.
H Annual
inspection
General Fund,
allocated to
appropriate
departments,
Non-tiered projects
Maintain firefighter
safety zones in
Foothills Park
City-owned Foothills
Park.
Mechanized
mowers, grazing
livestock.
Provide safe
haven for
firefighters during
extreme wildfire
conditions.
Mow grass annually. H Annual
inspection
General Fund,
allocated to
appropriate
departments,
Create a non-
combustible and a
defensible space zone around
barbeque structures
All barbeque structures
in all City parks in the
WUI.
Hand labor. Prevent ignitions. Annually. H Annual
inspection
General Fund,
allocated to
appropriate
departments.
Establish and
maintain areas of
low-fuel volume in
strategic locations
On ridgelines and
borders of City-owned
parks, and/or as
described in the FFMP.
Hand labor,
mechanized
mowers, grazing
livestock,
prescribed fire.
Assist in
containment of a
wildfire to prevent
spread into
private property.
Mow grass annually, 3-
5 year tree trimming
and brush removal.
H Annual
inspection
General Fund,
allocated to
appropriate
departments.
Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Annex 7 – Palo Alto (including Stanford University)
SWCA Environmental Consultants 16 June 2016
The following projects (Table 7.4) were identified by the Core Team during the development of
the 2009 FFMP Update.
Table 7.4. Mitigation Projects to be implemented as part of FFMP Update
Project Goal Actions
Maintain safe access,
egress and refuge
Roadside and driveway fuel modification to reduce fire intensity to allow for firefighting vehicles
access and ensure safe passage for staff and visitors to pre-determined safety zones.
Improve access to potential wildfire locations to increase effectiveness of firefighting resources
(road realignments, access upgrades)
Identify areas for potential use for firefighter safety and refuge during a fire (safety zones)
Minimizing damage to
developed areas
Reduce potential for ember production,
Manage fuels along borders with structures, anywhere around structures (within 100 feet)
Retrofit structures to make them more ignition-resistant
Enhance firefighting effectiveness
Reduce fuels around other facilities at risk (e.g. communications equipment, high use recreation
areas)
Reduce damage to
structures and developed
areas from wildfire near
structures
Manage fuels per Defensible Space Guidelines to reduce flame length to 2 feet within 30 feet of
structures
Reduce potential for
ignitions
Roadside fuel treatments
Reduce fuels around barbeque sites and selected electrical transmission lines
Ensure mechanical equipment has features to minimize ignitions
Conduct fuel management in a manner that prevents ignitions
Facilitate containment and
control of a fire
Strategically compartmentalize fuels in order to facilitate containment and control
Modify fuels to reduce fire intensity and allow firefighters better access to the fire, slow spread of
fire and make firefighting actions more effective,
Modify fuels to allow for backfires
Reduce the chance of
damage to life and property
by keeping fire from
crossing boundaries –
Participate in cooperative
projects with adjacent
landowners
Fuel management to compartmentalize the landscape
Fuel management along the borders of the Park/Preserve
Modification of the volume or structure of the fuels to reduce chance of ember production
Modification of the volume or structure of the fuels to enhance firefighting effectiveness
Minimize damage to natural
resources
Conduct pre-treatment surveys for sensitive species
Follow best management practices during fuel management
Fuel management around fire-sensitive areas to reduce fire intensity
Use of modified fire suppression in sensitive areas
Fuel modification for
ecosystem health
Reduce invasive species
Perform selected prescribed burns to promote fire-adapted native species
The following is a description of the goals for each of the types of projects that manage vegetation
as part of this plan:
ROADSIDE AND DRIVEWAY FUEL MODIFICATION FOR SAFE ACCESS AND EGRESS
Specific Goal of Action
The most important goal for this set of projects is to reduce fire intensity near roads to allow
firefighting vehicles to pass and ensure safe passage for staff and visitors to pre-determined safety
zones, or safe locations out of the parks. In addition, the projects outside of the City parks/preserves are aimed at facilitating access and egress between different portions of Palo Alto’s wildland urban interface (Figure 7.7).
Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Annex 7 – Palo Alto (including Stanford University)
SWCA Environmental Consultants 17 June 2016
Figure 7.7. Evacuation Routes External to Foothills Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve.
PA3
Vegetation maintenance on Highway 35 is the
responsibility of
CalTrans
Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Annex 7 – Palo Alto (including Stanford University)
SWCA Environmental Consultants 18 June 2016
FUEL MODIFICATION FOR FIREFIGHTER SAFETY
Specific Goal of Action
This project goal is specific to the safety of firefighters during emergency response when safe
refuge comprised of low fuels is vital.
STRUCTURE AND INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS – DEFENSIBLE SPACE
Specific Goal of Action
• Reduce damage to structures, developed areas and critical infrastructure from wildfire by
reducing flame length to two feet within 30 feet of structures by managing fuels per Defensible Space Guidelines in Section 1.6.8. In some cases, treatment will need to extend to 100 feet in order to reduce flames to two feet within thirty feet of a structure.
• Minimize negative effects of fuel manipulation on wildlands
• Reduce damage to wildlands from wildfire
IGNITION PREVENTION FUEL MANAGEMENT PROJECTS
Specific Goal of Action
Ignitions from barbeques may occur in Foothills Park. Ignition prevention relies upon fuel
management, coupled with education, signage, and enforcement of park rules regarding fire safety.
Under extreme fire weather conditions, the parks may be closed to the public. The fuel
management will consist of the following:
• Follow standards for defensible space for a 30-foot radius from the barbeque site.
• Remove vegetation to create a non-combustible zone for a 10-foot radius from the barbeque site.
FUEL MODIFICATION FOR CONTAINMENT EASE
Specific Goal of Action
The specific goal of modifying fuels is to compartmentalize fuels in order to facilitate the containment and control of a fire. The treatment areas are positioned in strategic locations, usually
on a ridgetop, with access, avoiding areas that would preclude the use of mechanical equipment
such as steep slopes or riparian areas. Fuels are modified to reduce fire intensity and thus allow
firefighters better access to the fire, making firefighting actions more effective. Fuel modification also creates more opportunities to backfire, which occurs during wildfires where fire suppression crews create large firebreaks in advance of the fire front. Fuel modification can also slow the
spread of a fire, further enhancing fire control efforts. Where trees abut grasslands in the new fuel
breaks, it is especially important to limb trees and remove shrubby understory from trees along the
edge of the forest canopy in order to break vertical continuity between grass and tree canopy. This action will remove the “ladder fuels” that promote crown fires and hinder fire containment. Table 7.5 describes proposed/conceptual fuel modification projects for the Palo Alto WUI.
Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Annex 7 – Palo Alto (including Stanford University)
SWCA Environmental Consultants 19 June 2016
Table 7.5. Fuel modification projects
Designation Project Description Acreage or
Distance Treatment Method
Foothills
F.C1 Containment Trappers Trail 72.51 acres mowing, grazing
F.C2
Containment
Pony Tracks south of Trappers
Ridge
2,975 feet
mow annually 10 feet on either size of
road, use a brush hog (or grazing
animals) to mow areas to the break in
slope both under wooded canopy and
in grasslands with cover of coyote
brush greater than 30%
F.C3 Containment Pony Tracks north of Trappers
Ridge 2,461 feet mowing, grazing
F.C4 Containment Bobcat point 5.28 acres graze with goats
F.C5 Containment North of entry Gate 3.47 acres graze with goats
F.C6 Containment Valley View Fire Trail 1,459 feet mowing
Pearson-Arastradero
A.C1 Containment Property boundary adjacent to
Liddicoat 5.39 acres grazing, mowing
A.C2 Containment Property boundary adjacent to
Stanford and Portola Pastures 5,371 feet grazing, mowing
A.C3
Containment Within Redtail Loop Trail, to
entire eastern boundary of
Preserve
48.72 acres
grazing
A.C4 Containment Property boundary adjacent to
Paso del Robles 7.71 acres grazing
A.C5 Containment Property boundary Laurel Glen
- north 11.22 acres grazing
A.C6 Containment Property boundary Laurel Glen
- south 4.05 acres grazing
A.C7 Containment Property boundary west of
Meadow Lark Trail 9.71 acres grazing, mowing
A.C8 Containment Property boundary adjacent to
1791 Arastradero Rd. 8.08 acres grazing (mowing is not possible)
A.C9 Containment Property boundary adjacent to
John Marthens 1,726 feet mowing
A.C10 Containment Arastradero Creek to
Arastradero Road 10,222 feet mowing, hand labor near riparian zone
A.C11 Containment Meadow Lark to Juan Bautista
Trail 8,893 feet mowing
A.C12 Containment Meadow Lark 1,569 feet mowing
A.C13 Containment Bowl Loop 1,388 feet mowing
A.C14 Containment Arastradero to extended split
RX1 and RX2 1,830 feet mowing
A.C15 Containment Acorn Trail 1,218 feet mowing
FUEL MODIFICATION FOR ECOSYSTEM HEALTH
Specific Goal of Action
The City should conduct fuel modification to reduce the invasion of coyote bush into grasslands and thus reduce expected heat output. The objectives are to maintain grasslands and restore the
native pattern of vegetation on the landscape.
Other fuel management projects also enhance ecosystem health (Table 7.6). Reducing the amount
and height of understory shrubs creates a vegetative structure that is more open at the forest floor,
with less biomass and is vertically discontinuous; this mimics the pre-fire-suppression era. This would be done either with goat herds or with hand labor forces.
Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Annex 7 – Palo Alto (including Stanford University)
SWCA Environmental Consultants 20 June 2016
Location and Description of Projects
Table 7.6. Project locations for Ecosystem Health
Designation Project Description Acreage Treatment Method
Foothills
F.C1 Containment Trappers Trail 72.51 acres mowing, grazing 2-3 rotation
Pearson-Arastradero
A.Rx1 Containment Juan Bautista Prescribe fire north 18.25 acres Rx fire, grazing
A.Rx2 Containment Acorn Trail Prescribed fire south 24,45 acres Rx fire, grazing
A.C3 Containment Within Redtail Loop Trail, to entire
eastern boundary of Preserve 48.72 acres grazing, mowing
COOPERATIVE FUEL MANAGEMENT PROJECTS FOR OFFSITE FIRE CONTAINMENT
AND EVACUATION EASE
Specific Goal of Action
The goal of this project is to prevent a wildfire from spreading into the parks. The City should
work with adjacent landowners to institute and maintain the vegetation in a condition that would
facilitate containment and ease evacuation operations.
Location and Description of Projects
Most importantly, the enhancement of roadside treatments along Page Mill Road requires
cooperation with several other landowners and agencies. Cooperative projects include the
formalization of agreements for passage through properties during time of emergency evacuation
with public and private land owners and managers. Develop partnerships to address regional evacuation routes from residential and public areas and fuel management on City-owned open
space adjacent to private structures, as detailed in the following section. In some cases, such as on
the western edge of Foothill Park east of Carmel and Ramona Road in Los Trancos Woods, access
through private parcels would enable fuel management on City lands that would benefit both
parties involved.
Sudden Oak Death has been observed in many locations within the Foothills area. At this time the
areas are small and consist of one or two trees. The urgency for treatment of these affected areas
is related to its location. Dead trees near structures, City property boundaries and along roads
should be treated first. For example, dead trees along evacuation routes would get higher priority
than those in the middle of remote woodland. However, if entire stands die, or Sudden Oak Death changes the fuel characteristics of the stand, the priority and potential treatments would change.
The location and extent of stands affected by Sudden Oak Death should be monitored.
Treatment should be consistent with the City policy regarding Sudden Oak Death. Treatments
generally entail removal of dead material smaller than six inches in diameter. The trunks of the
trees may remain if needed for wildlife habitat, however it is often difficult to retain just the larger material. The proximity of California bay to the foliage of oaks has been linked with the spread
of Sudden Oak Death. Removal or trimming of bay trees to separate the foliage is another strategy
to prevent further spread.
UNRESTRICTED – FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
THREAT AND HAZARDS
IDENTIFICATION AND
RISK ASSESSMENT
2017 UPDATE
4/21/2017
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
2| Page
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ 2
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... 3
List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. 3
1 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................. 4
2 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 5
3 Goal Setting ..............................................................................................................................7
4 Hazard Identification and Prioritization ................................................................................ 12
4.1 Identified Hazards and Threats ...................................................................................... 12
4.2 Natural Hazard Prioritization ........................................................................................ 20
4.3 Technological Hazard Prioritization .............................................................................. 22
4.4 Human Caused Threat Prioritization ............................................................................. 23
4.5 Threats and Hazards of Most Concern .......................................................................... 24
5 Hazard Profiles ...................................................................................................................... 25
5.1 Non-Natural Hazard Profile Structure .......................................................................... 25
5.2 Earthquake Hazard Summary ....................................................................................... 26
5.3 Flood Hazard Summary (Inclusive of Severe Storms) ................................................... 26
5.4 Airplane Accident Profile ............................................................................................... 27
5.5 Hazardous Waste/Materials Spill Profile ...................................................................... 28
5.6 Urban Fire Profile .......................................................................................................... 32
5.7 Major Crimes .................................................................................................................. 33
5.8 Cyber Attack Profile ....................................................................................................... 35
5.9 Workplace Violence Profile ............................................................................................ 40
5.10 Civil Disorder .................................................................................................................. 41
6 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 43
6.1 Recommendations for Action ........................................................................................ 45
6.2 THIRA Maintenance ...................................................................................................... 49
7 Appendices ........................................................................................................................... A-1
7.1 Appendix A: Planning Process ...................................................................................... A-1
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
3| Page
List of Tables
Table 4-1 National Planning Scenarios .......................................................................................... 13
Table 4-2 Comprehensive List of Hazards and Definitions ........................................................... 13
Table 5-1 Common Types of Cyber Attacks .................................................................................. 36
Table 5-2 Common Sources of Cybersecurity Threats ................................................................. 37
List of Figures
Figure 3-3-1 National Preparedness Core Capabilities....................................................................7
Figure 5-5-1 Statistics of Part I and Part II Crimes in Palo Alto April 2014-2017 ........................ 34
Figure 5-2 Statistics of Part I and Part II Crimes in Palo Alto from the PaloAlso FIscal Year 2013
Annual Report ............................................................................................................................... 35
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
4| Page
1 Executive Summary
The 2017 Update of the THIRA includes an updated threat and hazard assessment in Chapter 4
following the City’s adoption of an updated Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP). 1 This
community based planning process prompted the update to Intentional Hazards which included
an assessment by a group of Bay Area public safety professionals and an analysis of recorded
Part 1 and Part 2 crimes. Technological hazards were not changed. The body of the 2014
THIRA remains, and highlighted sections demonstrate where modifications were made.
To evaluate the City of Palo Alto’s capabilities for addressing all hazard events, the City of Palo
Alto Office of Emergency Services (OES) conducted a collaborative planning process in order to
develop the City of Palo Alto 2014 Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
(THIRA). This assessment provides the outcomes of this process and is compliant with the U.S.
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 201.
This THIRA report will be used to inform ongoing planning efforts throughout the city.
Palo Alto OES established a Planning Team of key stakeholders to ensure development of a well-
rounded, inclusive assessment of all relevant threats/hazards and the City’s capabilities to
address the five mission areas of prevention, protection, mitigation, response, and recovery.
The Planning Team met in person for two full day workshops and additionally provided input
via virtual reviews conducted through email correspondence. Prior to the Planning Team
workshops, the executive committee met to draft Desired Outcomes. This preliminary
coordination by the leadership set the tone for the THIRA planning process and established
guidelines for the Planning Team as they worked through each of the CPG 201 steps.
The two full day workshops were designed to follow CPG 201. Each workshop was facilitated to
emphasize comprehensive discussion and integrate expertise by Planning Team members for
relevant topics. The first workshop focused on confirming the threats and hazards of concern
(CPG 201 Step 1) and developing context (CPG 201 Step 2) to help evaluate potential impacts.
The second workshop was a facilitated discussion to validate the potential impacts for each of
the developed scenarios. The Planning Team developed Capability Targets based on the greatest
estimated impact for each of the 31 Core Capabilities (CPG 201 Step 3). Once the Capability
Targets were approved, the Planning Team examined each of the core capabilities against the
Capability Target and identified gaps and recent advances in Planning, Organization,
equipment, Training, and Exercise (POETE). For each of the identified gaps, subject matter
experts identified initial recommendations on how to address these gaps (CPG 201 Step 4). As
the City of Palo Alto moves forward with the results of the THIRA, it is recommended that the
identified gaps be further discussed and analyzed in order to identify the root cause of the gap.
Once the root cause is determined by the stakeholders, the identified recommendations should
be revised, corrective actions determined and resource estimations be made in order to
implement and prioritize the recommendations.
1 The LHMP provides an empirical analysis of Natural Hazards and their likely impact to our
community. See www.cityofpaloalto.org/lhmap for the current version.
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
5| Page
2 Introduction
The City of Palo Alto is at risk to a variety of natural and non-natural hazards. Stanford
University, located within the City’s jurisdictional boundary, is also at risk to these same
hazards. Preventing, protecting from, mitigating, responding to, and recovering from hazards
and threats requires extensive coordination among City agencies and local partners, including
Stanford. The City’s Office of Emergency Services (OES) leads that coordination with the goal of
“developing, maintaining, and sustaining a citywide, comprehensive, all hazard, risk-based
emergency management program that engages the whole community”2. The Stanford University
Department of Public Safety and the Stanford University Environmental Health & Safety
(EH&S) Department partner with the City to enhance their emergency preparedness, mitigation,
and response capabilities. Under separate contracts, the City provides all 911 Public Safety
Answering Point (PSAP) dispatch services to Stanford, and is also the prime Fire and EMS
provider to the University. Together, the City’s OES and representatives from Stanford
University supported the formulation of this plan.
To better understand and effectively prioritize risk reduction measures, OES conducted a
collaborative planning process with an Executive Committee and a broader Stakeholder Group
to evaluate current capabilities with regard to prevention, protection, mitigation, response and
recovery. This Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA) Report is the
result of the collaborative planning process. It is compliant with the U.S. Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 201, Second Edition,
released in August 2013, which outlines a process to help communities identify capability targets
and resource requirements necessary to address anticipated and unanticipated risks.
The result of the THIRA process is an organized evaluation of vulnerability and implementation
measures based on the necessary capabilities to deal with the hazards/threats of most concern.
This report should inform ongoing City and University planning efforts including, but not
limited to, the following:
• Emergency Operations Plan
• Hazard Mitigation Plan
• Emergency Planning & Homeland Security Strategic Plan
• Operating Budget
• Capital Budget
• Office of Emergency Services Annual Report
• Comprehensive Plan
DHS requires annual THIRAs from States and Tier 1 Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI)
organizations. The City of Palo Alto THIRA, as a local government assessment, may be shared as
appropriate with the San Francisco Bay Area UASI and California Governor’s Office of
2 Office of Emergency Services (OES): Executive Summary (Rev. 8/24/12)
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
6| Page
Emergency Services (Cal OES) to ensure consistency in vulnerability analyses. Both the
California State THIRA and San Francisco Bay Area UASI THIRA were consulted in the
preparation of this City of Palo Alto THIRA.
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
7| Page
3 Goal Setting
Presidential Policy Directive 8: National Preparedness sets forth a national goal for “a secure
and resilient Nation with the capabilities required across the whole community to prevent,
protect against, mitigate, respond to, and recover from the threats and hazards that pose the
greatest risk”3. To achieve this, the National Preparedness Goal identifies 31 necessary core
capabilities. The City of Palo Alto Executive Team reviewed the National Preparedness Goal and
through discussion established a more refined set of desired outcomes for the City based on the
31 core capabilities.
Figure 3-3-1 National Preparedness Core Capabilities
The following statements represent an ideal condition of the whole community’s capability to
prevent, protect against, mitigate, respond to, and recover from the threats and hazards of most
concern.
1. Planning
Conduct a consolidated, coordinated, integrated planning process to ensure participation by the
whole community using an all hazards approach and defined planning cycles.
3 National Preparedness Goal
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
8| Page
2. Public Information and Warning
Provide information in a timely and appropriate manner to the affected population including
those with functional needs. Information should be consistent with the threat or hazard and
enable people to take appropriate actions or protective measures.
3. Operational Coordination
Establish and maintain a unified and coordinated operational Incident Command System (ICS)
compliant structure and process that appropriately integrates all critical stakeholders to include
private/public partners (e.g. hospitals, residents, ESV, schools, businesses, etc.) and supports
the execution of core capabilities.
Prevention
4. Forensics and Attribution
Conduct investigation, evidence collection, and analysis for criminal prosecution as well as assist
in preventing initial or follow-on terrorist acts.
5. Intelligence and Information Sharing
Interface with allied public safety agencies, regional planning entities, and other relevant
stakeholders to collect, analyze, and disseminate timely, accurate, and actionable information.
6. Interdiction and Disruption
Coordinate with other agencies to facilitate interdiction of cargo and persons that could present
a threat to the City of Palo Alto and Stanford University.
7. Screening Search and Detection
Screen and search cargo, packages, and persons if/when legally permissible and justified. For
example, observe safety protocols with those entering Stanford Stadium for certain, security-risk
events.
Protection
8. Access Control and Identity Verification
Establish verification of identity to authorize, grant, or deny physical and cyber access to critical
infrastructure, key asset locations, and networks.
9. Cybersecurity
Protect against malicious activity directed toward critical infrastructure, key resources, and
networks.
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
9| Page
10. Physical Protective Measures
Protect people, structures, materials, products, and systems of key operational activities and
critical infrastructure sectors against identified or perceived threats.
11. Risk Management for Protection Programs and Activities
Complete and/or encourage risk assessments, using standardized methodologies/models, for
critical infrastructure/key resources (CIKR) and assets.
12. Supply Chain Integrity and Security
Accounting for reliance on digital technology and modern management practices, work with and
encourage private sector to build resiliency in the supply chain and develop tangible and
intellectual methods to protect it.
Mitigation
13. Community Resilience
Engage the whole community in improving resilience through development and implementation
of local risk management plans, techniques, strategies, training, and exercises.
14. Long–term Vulnerability Reduction
Implement ongoing strategies to achieve measurable decreases in the long-term vulnerability of
critical infrastructure, systems, and community features at risk to identified threats and
hazards.
15. Risk and Disaster Resilience Assessment
Maintain a risk assessment that includes identification and analysis of information about
security gaps, localized vulnerabilities and risk consequences in City systems and facilities.
16. Threats and Hazards Identification
Continually review/identify/maintain the assessment of identified threats and hazards.
Response
17. Critical Transportation
Establish physical access through appropriate transportation corridors and deliver required
resources in an effort to save lives and to meet the needs of disaster survivors.
18. Environmental Response/Health and Safety
Conduct health and safety hazard and critical systems assessments, and disseminate guidance
and resources, including the deployment of hazardous materials teams, to support
environmental health and safety actions for response personnel and the affected population and
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
10| Page
area. Conduct water sampling from established locations to determine potential access breach
and/or contamination.
19. Fatality Management Services
Conduct operations to recover fatalities in coordination with Operational Area/regional/state,
federal and NGO partners.
20. Mass Care Services
Move and deliver resources and capabilities to meet the needs of disaster survivors, including
individuals with access and functional needs and others who may be considered at-risk.
Coordinate operations with government and NGO assistance partners.
21. Mass Search and Rescue Operations
Conduct search and rescue operations to locate and rescue persons in distress.
22. On-Scene Security and Protection
Establish a safe and secure environment for the affected area.
23. Operational Communications
Establish and maintain the capability and capacity for timely and sufficient integrated
communications in support of security, situational awareness, and operations. This includes
redundant capabilities and resilient systems and facilities.
24. Public and Private Services and Resources
Mobilize and coordinate governmental, nongovernmental, and private sector resources within
and outside the affected areas to save lives, sustain lives, meet basic human needs, stabilize the
incident, and transition to recovery.
25. Public Health and Medical Services
With operational area support as needed, complete triage and initial stabilization of casualties
and begin coordination of transport to definitive care for those likely to survive their injuries.
26. Situational Assessment
Deliver information sufficient to inform City decisions, through collaboration with key partners,
regarding immediate life-saving and -sustaining activities and engage governmental, private,
and civic-sector resources within and outside of the affected area to meet basic human needs
and stabilize the incident and maintain public services.
27. Infrastructure Systems
Decrease and stabilize immediate infrastructure threats to the affected population, following all
City EOP procedures.
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
11| Page
Recovery
28. Economic Recovery
Develop a plan with whole community partners, with a specified timeline for redeveloping
community infrastructures to contribute to resiliency, accessibility, and sustainability.
29. Health and Social Services
Restore basic health and social services functions with support from Operational
Area/state/federal and NGO partners.
30. Housing
Assess preliminary housing impacts and needs, identify currently available options for
temporary housing, and plan for permanent housing in coordination with Operational
Area/state/federal and NGO partners.
31. Natural and Cultural Resources
Mitigate impacts, stabilize natural and cultural resources, and conduct a preliminary assessment
of the impacts to identify and implement protections during the various stages of incident
management—from stabilization through recovery.
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
12| Page
4 Hazard Identification and Prioritization
4.1 Identified Hazards and Threats
Several City and regional emergency management and planning documents were reviewed
to identify a comprehensive list of hazards for consideration. These documents address
both natural and human caused hazards that have the potential to impact Palo Alto and the
Bay Area. Many of these documents estimate the impacts that result from the identified
hazards. City policies that aid in emergency prevention, protection, mitigation, response,
and recovery are highlighted in these documents. The reviewed documents which were
integral in providing key information are listed below:
City of Palo Alto Emergency Operations Plan, June 2007
Palo Alto City Council Priority Update on Emergency Preparedness, September 2010
City of Palo Alto Terrorism Response Plan, 2001
City of Palo Alto Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2011
City of Palo Alto Energy Assurance Plan, July 2013
After Action Report Power Outage and Plane Crash, May 2010
After Action Report Winter Storm of December 23, 2012, February 2013
City of Palo Alto Emergency Planning Strategic Plan, November 2009
State of California THIRA Draft, December 2012
Bay Area Urban Area Security Initiative THIRA, December 2012
San Francisco THIRA, 2012
National Planning Scenarios (See table 4-1 below)
San Francisco Bay Area Regional Emergency Coordination Plan, March 2008
City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, July 20074; Land Use Designation Map, March
2011; Housing Element, November 2013; Updated version to be released in 2014/2015
In addition to the documents listed above, the Infrastructure Blue Ribbon Commission Final
Report on Palo Alto’s Infrastructure: Catching Up, Keeping Up, and Moving Ahead (December
4 The City is in the process of updating the 1998-2010 Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan which will
contain updated goals, policies, and programs relating to safety and natural hazards. The
update is expected to be completed by the end of 2015 and will have an expected horizon year of
2030. The updated Comprehensive Plan will be consistent with this Threat and Hazard
Identification and Risk Assessment.
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
13| Page
2011) specifically helped to identify the City’s critical facilities and infrastructure used in
estimating impacts and assessing vulnerability.
Table 4-1 National Planning Scenarios
Scenario 1: Nuclear Detonation
Scenario 2: Biological Attack – Aerosol Anthrax
Scenario 3: Biological Disease Outbreak – Pandemic Influenza
Scenario 4: Biological Attack - Plague
Scenario 5: Chemical Attack – Blister Agent
Scenario 6: Chemical Attack – Toxic Industrial Chemicals
Scenario 7: Chemical Attack – Nerve Agent
Scenario 8: Chemical Attack – Chlorine Tank Explosion
Scenario 9: Natural Disaster – Major Earthquake
Scenario 10: Natural Disaster – Major Hurricane
Scenario 11: Radiological Attack – Radiological Dispersal Devices
Scenario 12: Explosives Attack – Bombing Using Improvised Explosive Devices
Scenario 13: Biological Attack – Food Contamination
Scenario 14: Biological Attack – Foreign Animal Disease (Foot and Mouth Disease)
Scenario 15: Cyber Attack
Table 3-2 Comprehensive List of Hazards and Definitions presents the comprehensive list of
hazards as approved by the Executive Committee and considered by the Stakeholder Group.
Table 4-2 Comprehensive List of Hazards and Definitions
Natural Hazard Definition
Earthquake An earthquake is a phenomenon resulting from the sudden release
of stored energy in the crust of the Earth in the form of seismic
waves. They can devastate regions and destroy nearly any type of
asset. They can cause injuries and death due to falling debris and
broken glass. A major earthquake could trigger significant
landslides, spark fires, and release toxic chemicals. If an
earthquake occurred during the rainy winter season, landslides
would be worsened and flooding could occur, exacerbated by
damaged creek culverts and storm drains.
Extreme Heat A heat wave is defined as prolonged periods of excessive heat, often
combined with excessive humidity. Extreme heat is defined as
temperatures that hover ten degrees or more above the average
high temperature for the region and last for several weeks. The
main concern in periods of extreme heat is the potential public
health impact, such as heat exhaustion or heat stroke.
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
14| Page
Flood/Winter Storm A flood is any high flow, overflow, or inundation by water which
causes or threatens damage. Flooding is often caused by winter
storms in the City of Palo Alto. Flooding can contaminate potable
water, wastewater, and irrigation systems, which may negatively
affect the quality of the water supply and result in an increase of
water and food borne diseases. Severe winter storms can cause
flooding.
High Wind Wind is associated with multiple natural hazards. In some
hazards, wind is the primary cause of damage, while in others,
wind plays a contributory or auxiliary role. Damaging wind is
primarily associated with hurricanes, tornadoes, downbursts,
severe thunderstorms, and winter storms. Wind plays a
contributory role in wildfire generation and propagation and can
exacerbate severe droughts as well as cause trees to fall on power
lines.
Landslides In a landslide, masses of rock, earth, or debris move down a slope.
Landslides may be small or large, slow or rapid. They are activated
by storms, earthquakes, fires, alternate freezing and thawing, and
steepening of slopes by erosion or human modification.
Public Health
Pandemic
The most readily apparent public health emergency is an outbreak
of influenza pandemic although other public health emergencies
are just as likely. An influenza pandemic is a worldwide outbreak
of disease that occurs when a new influenza virus appears in
human population, causes serious illness and then spreads easily
from person to person worldwide. Pandemics are different from
seasonal outbreaks of the flu. Since 2005, a high virulent strain of
bird flu (H5N1), which developed in Asia, has steadily spread in
birds to the Middle East, Africa, and Europe. The fatality rate of
this particular strain is more than 50 percent. The Center for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has estimated that, in the
US alone, a "minor" influenza pandemic could infect up to 200
million people and cause between 100,000-200,000 deaths. The
potential financial impact on the US of this type of pandemic is
estimated at $166 billion. Pandemics could continue for up to 24
months and cause major disruptions in supply chains for essential
goods and services. Other outbreaks could include H1N1,
Whooping Cough, Salmonella, E. coli, and Measles.
Tornado A tornado appears as a rotating, funnel-shaped cloud that extends
from a thunderstorm to the ground with whirling winds that can
reach 300 miles per hour. Damage paths can be in excess of one
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
15| Page
mile wide and fifty miles long. Waterspouts are tornadoes that
form over water.
Tsunami A tsunami is a sea wave of local or distant origin that results from
large-scale seafloor displacements associated with large
earthquakes, major submarine slides, or exploding volcanic
islands.
Wildland Fire A wildfire is an uncontrollable fire beginning in a wilderness area,
typified by its large size, and ability to spread quickly or change
direction suddenly. High temperatures and drought followed by an
active period of vegetation growth provide the most dangerous
conditions. Wildfires can affect any type of asset and may threaten
major population centers when they break on the rural-urban
fringe.
Technological
Hazard
Definition
Airplane Accident Aviation accidents may be caused by problems originating from
mechanical difficulties, pilot error, or acts of terrorism. Airplane
accidents can result from major aircraft experiencing trouble while
in flight or from mid-air collisions between aircraft flying over or
near Palo Alto since the City lies in the flight path of two
international airports: San Jose and San Francisco. There is also
the potential for this type of accident to occur over water.
Dam Failure Flooding inundation areas in the event of dam failure extend
across a wide region of northeastern Palo Alto. Reservoir failures
that would affect Palo Alto include Felt Lake, Searsville Lake, and
Foothills Park (Boronda Lake).
Financial Disruption A situation where the markets cease to function in a regular
manner, typically characterized by rapid and large market declines.
Market disruptions can result from both physical threats to the
stock exchange or unusual trading (as in a crash). In either case,
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
16| Page
the disruption typically causes panic and results in disorderly
market conditions.
Food/Water
Contamination
A water system can become contaminated as a result of flooding or
by saltwater intrusion. Food contamination refers to the presence
in food of harmful chemicals and microorganisms which can cause
consumer illness.
Hazardous Materials
Spill
The release of a hazardous material to the environment could cause
a multitude of problems. Although these incidents can happen
almost anywhere, certain areas of the city are at higher risk, such
as near roadways that are frequently used for transporting
hazardous materials and locations with industrial facilities that
use, store, or dispose of such materials. Areas crossed by railways,
waterways, airways, and pipelines also have increased potential for
mishaps. Hazards can occur during production, storage,
transportation, use, or disposal. Communities can be at risk if a
chemical is used unsafely or released in harmful amounts into the
environment. Hazardous materials can cause death, serious injury,
long-lasting health effects, and damage to buildings, the
environment, homes, and other property.
Oil Spill An oil spill is the release of a liquid petroleum hydrocarbon into
the environment due to human activity or technological error. The
term is usually applied to marine oil spills, but spills can also occur
on land. Spills may be due to releases of oil from tankers, offshore
platforms, and drilling rigs and wells. An oil spill represents an
immediate fire hazard and can contaminate drinking water
supplies. Contamination can also have an economic impact on
tourism and marine resource extraction industries. Clean up and
recovery is time and cost consuming.
Power
Blackout/Energy
Shortage/Utilities
Failure
Energy disruptions are considered to be a form of Lifeline System
Failure. This can be the consequence of any of the other hazards
identified or as a primary hazard, absent of an outside trigger. A
failure could involve the City's potable water system, power system,
natural gas system, wastewater system, communication system, or
transportation system.
Train Accident Most train accidents are caused by human error, often relating to
communications, speed limits, and braking. Train accidents also
can occur because of equipment failure. Rail accidents include
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
17| Page
derailment, collisions, railroad grade crossing, obstruction,
explosion, or fire/violent rupture.
Urban Fire In addition to the areas within the City limits considered to be in
the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI), the more densely built
“flatlands” are also at risk. The City has over 25,000 housing units
and a significant business base. The proximity of structures to
each other within the City creates additional exposure to
widespread urban fire. Localized, single-structure fires sometimes
occur in Palo Alto. Major uncontrolled events are a possibility, but
rarely occur.
Human Caused
Hazard
Definition
Agro-Terrorism Agro-terrorism is the use of a biological or chemical agent against
crops, livestock, or poultry. The agent could be any of a wide range
of pathogens or toxins. Agro-terrorism may be used to endanger
public heath, to reduce the food supply, or as a strategic economic
weapon.
Aircraft as a weapon Aircraft as a weapon (AAW) is a suicide attack using an airplane to
target an asset. The primary explosive is the airplane's fuel supply.
Aircraft include but are not limited to large commercial passenger
craft, cargo craft, small single or double engine private craft,
gliders, helicopters, and lighter-than-aircraft.
Biological Attack
(contagious and
non-contagious)
A contagious biological attack is an attack on a population using a
communicable, infectious disease. Effects occur after an
incubation period which varies with the biological strain in use.
They can quickly infect large populations. Bioterrorism can cause
mass panic and societal disruption.
Chemical
Agent/Toxic
Inhalation Release
Chemical weapons kill by attacking the nervous system and lungs,
or by interfering with a body's ability to absorb oxygen. Some are
designed to incapacitate by producing severe burns and blisters.
These include such agents as mustard, tabun, sarin (GB), and
nerve gas. Chemical agents could be introduced through an HVAC
system or air inlets in buildings such as apartments, commercial
offices, or public facilities.
Civil Disorder Civil disorder refers to unrest caused by a group of people and may
include terrorist activities. Public demonstrations have the
potential to lead to looting and rioting. There are many potential
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
18| Page
causes for civil disorder including: animal rights, labor disputes,
civil rights, campus related issues, abortion rights, neighboring
jurisdictions, political issues, events (sports, music, etc.), and
spontaneous miscellaneous events. Potential consequences from
acts of civil disorder include: disruptions of police and city services,
closure of roads, rioting, property damage, and injuries to
protesters, police officers, and uninvolved parties.
Conventional Attack Light armed attack (small arms (ballistics) which include guns and
rockets, or stand-off weapons such as rocket propelled grenades or
mortars) with one or more people acting for a terrorist group, anti-
government/anti-political group, etc.
Major Crime A major criminal incident (shooting, homicide, kidnapping)
including multiple suspects or multiple victims with an ongoing
threat to the community.
Cyber Attack A cyber terrorist can infiltrate many institutions including banking,
medical, education, government, military, and communication and
infrastructure systems. The majority of effective malicious cyber-
activity has become web-based. Recent trends indicate that
hackers are targeting users to steal personal information and
moving away from targeting computers by causing system failure.
Hostage/Assassin A hostage situation includes a person or group of people seized or
held as security for the fulfillment of a condition. An assassin is a
person who murders an important person in a surprise attack for
political or religious reasons.
IED Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) are constructed using
conventional explosives and flammable materials. There are a
variety of detonation methods. Conventional explosives include,
but are not limited to: ammonium nitrate and fuel oil, TATP, TNT,
RDX, PETN, C4, Semtex, or Dynamite. Flammable materials
include, but are not limited to: gasoline, kerosene, alcohol, iodine
crystals, magnesium, glycerin, or aluminum powder. An IED is
likely to cause localized consequence primarily in the form of
casualties and economic impact.
Nuclear Attack/Acts
of War
The detonation of a nuclear weapon meets the US DODs definition
of a Weapon of Mass Destruction, which includes any weapon or
device that is intended or has the capability to cause death or
serious bodily injury to a significant number of people through the
release of toxic or poisonous chemicals or their precursors, a
disease organism, or radiation or radioactivity. A nuclear bomb
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
19| Page
attack could occur without warning and cause mass devastation
within seconds. Radiation can exist in the atmosphere and in the
ground for years after an event. A nuclear attack would cause more
damage in a metropolitan area.
Radiological
Dispersion Device
(RDD)
RDDs (commonly known as “dirty bombs”) consist of radioactive
materials wrapped in conventional explosives, which upon
detonation release deadly radioactive particles into the
environment.
Sabotage/Theft Sabotage is a deliberate action aimed at weakening another entity
through subversion, destruction, obstruction, or destruction. The
result of sabotage could be the destruction or damage of a vital
facility. Some criminals have engaged in sabotage for reasons of
extortion. Political sabotage is sometimes used to harass or
damage the reputation of a political opponent.
Terrorism Terrorist activities include bombings, kidnappings, shootings, and
hijackings. 80% of terrorist activity is perpetrated through the use
of explosives, and the other 20% is a combination of arson,
vandalism, and assassination. The actual use of terrorist chemical,
nuclear, and biological weapons has occurred less than a handful of
times in the last 50 years. The common kinds of terrorist
situations (explosions, fires, vandalism, and shootings) are the
same kind of critical incidents first responders handle on a daily
basis. Terrorist activity can be conducted by an active shooter, an
individual actively engaging in killing or attempting to kill people
in a confined and populated area using a firearm. Targets of an
armed attack vary; however, in recent history, schools, office
buildings, federal/state owned buildings, religious institutions,
military installations, and large public areas have all been subject
to armed attacks. An active shooter may be a disgruntled student
or group of students, an employee, or an anti-government/anti-
political/extremist citizen or group.
Vehicle Born IED Vehicle Born Improvised Explosive Devices (VBIEDs) are
constructed using conventional explosives and flammable
materials. VBIEDs involve the use of cars, trucks, and other
vehicles as the package/container to deliver explosive payloads to a
target. Larger vehicles enable larger amounts of explosives,
resulting in a greater impact. Functioning of devices can vary
within the same methods as the package types and can have the
same common characteristics as other IEDs. Some examples in the
U.S. include the 1993 World Trade Center bombing (a precursor to
9/11) and the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City.
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
20| Page
Workplace Violence Workplace violence is violence or the threat of violence against
workers. It includes any act or threat of physical violence,
harassment, intimidation, or other threatening disruptive behavior
that occurs at the worksite. It can occur at or outside the
workplace and can range from threats and verbal abuse to physical
assaults and homicide. It can affect and involve employees, clients,
customers, and visitors. Workplace violence includes locations
such as churches, malls, etc. and may be the result of a person
acting alone.
The Stakeholder Group, through a facilitated exercise reviewed the comprehensive list of
hazards/threats and prioritized them to identify those of most concern. The prioritization
methodology is presented in the following sections.
4.2 Natural Hazard Prioritization5
The Palo Alto LHMP rated natural hazards through a qualitative analysis of probability and
impact to people and property based on the scale of the hazard. The probability of occurrence of
a hazard is indicated by a probability factor based on likelihood of annual occurrence:
• High—Hazard event is likely to occur within 25 years (Probability Factor = 3).
• Medium—Hazard event is likely to occur within 100 years (Probability Factor =2).
• Low—Hazard event is not likely to occur within 100 years (Probability Factor =1).
• No exposure—There is no probability of occurrence (Probability Factor = 0).
Hazard impacts were assessed in three categories: impacts on people, impacts on property and
impacts on the local economy. Numerical impact factors were assigned as follows:
• People—Values were assigned based on the percentage of the total population exposed to the
hazard event. The degree of impact on individuals will vary and is not measurable, so the
calculation assumes for simplicity and consistency that all people exposed to a hazard because
they live in a hazard zone will be equally impacted when a hazard event occurs. It should be
noted that planners can use an element of subjectivity when assigning values for impacts on
people. Impact factors were assigned as follows:
o High—50 percent or more of the population is exposed to a hazard (Impact Factor = 3).
o Medium—25 percent to 49 percent of the population is exposed to a hazard (Impact
Factor = 2).
o Low—25 percent or less of the population is exposed to the hazard (Impact Factor = 1).
o No impact—None of the population is exposed to a hazard (Impact Factor = 0).
• Property—Values were assigned based on the percentage of the total property value exposed to
the hazard event:
5 Santa Clara County Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017, Volume 1, pp.5-2 – 5-3.
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
21| Page
o High—30 percent or more of the total assessed property value is exposed to a hazard
(Impact Factor = 3).
o Medium—15 percent to 29 percent of the total assessed property value is exposed to a
hazard (Impact Factor = 2).
o Low—14 percent or less of the total assessed property value is exposed to the hazard
(Impact Factor = 1).
o No impact—None of the total assessed property value is exposed to a hazard (Impact
Factor = 0).
• Economy—Values were assigned based on the percentage of the total property value
vulnerable to the hazard event. Values represent estimates of the loss from a major event of each
hazard in comparison to the total replacement value of the property exposed to the hazard. For
some hazards, such as wildfire, landslide and severe weather, vulnerability was considered to be
the same as exposure due to the lack of loss estimation tools specific to those hazards. Loss
estimates separate from the exposure estimates were generated for the earthquake and flood
hazards using Hazus.
o High—Estimated loss from the hazard is 20 percent or more of the total exposed
property value (Impact Factor = 3).
o Medium—Estimated loss from the hazard is 10 percent to 19 percent of the total exposed
property value (Impact Factor = 2).
o Low—Estimated loss from the hazard is 9 percent or less of the total exposed property
value (Impact Factor = 1).
o No impact—No loss is estimated from the hazard (Impact Factor = 0).
The impacts of each hazard category were assigned a weighting factor to reflect the significance
of the impact. These weighting factors are consistent with those typically used for measuring
the benefits of hazard mitigation actions: impact on people was given a weighting factor of 3;
impact on property was given a weighting factor of 2; and impact on the economy was given a
weighting factor of 1.
The final total risk ranking of Natural Hazards is summarized in Table 3.3.
Table 3-3. Natural Hazards Risk Ranking6
Rank Hazard Type Risk Rating Score (Probability x Impact) Category
1 Earthquake 48 High
2 Flood 42 High
3 Severe Weather 33 Medium
4 Wildfire 15a Medium
4 Dam and Levee
Failure 15a Medium
5 Drought 9 Low
6 Landslide 0 None
6 Palo Alto Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex 2017, p. 1-15.
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
22| Page
4.3 Technological Hazard Prioritization
No Changes were made in the 2017 update to Technological Hazards.
Each technological hazard was reviewed for its potential to occur. The Stakeholder Group shared
knowledge, concerns, and other pertinent information to come to a consensus on rating each
technological hazard as low, medium, high, or very high.
Table 4-4 Technological Hazards Rating Criteria
Technological Hazards Ranking Criteria Rating
An event is imminent. Experts have confirmed potential for
occurrence.
Very High
An event is expected/probable. Experts have confirmed potential
for occurrence.
High
An event is possible. Potential for occurrence is assumed but not
verified.
Medium
An event is unlikely. Potential for occurrence is extremely limited. Low
Table 4-5 Technological Hazard Rating Results
Technological Hazard Rating
Airplane Accident High
Dam Failure* Low
Financial Disruption Low
Food/Water Contamination Medium
Hazardous Materials Spill High
Oil Spill Medium
Power Blackout/Energy Shortage/Utilities Failure Medium
Train Accident Medium
Urban Fire High
* Rating results shown have been considered as independent hazards
and do not include secondary or cascading events. Dam failure
includes technological failure risk (engineering) and does not include
secondary risk from an earthquake.
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
23| Page
4.4 Human Caused Threat Prioritization
For the 2017 Update, planners convened a select group of Bay Area public safety professionals
who routinely participate in a monthly intelligence sharing forum to provide qualitative input on
human caused hazards. This information was then compared to Law Enforcement Part 1 and
Part 2 crime reports for a more precise quantitative assessment of risk.
Each human caused threat was reviewed for its potential to occur. The Stakeholder Group
shared knowledge, concerns, and other pertinent information to come to a consensus on rating
each human caused threat as low, medium, high, or very high.
Table 4-6 Human Caused Threat Rating Criteria
Human Caused Threat Ranking Criteria Rating
The likelihood of a threat, weapon, and tactic being used
against a site or building is imminent. Internal decision
makers and/or external law enforcement and intelligence
agencies determine the threat is credible.
Very High
The likelihood of a threat, weapon, and tactic being used
against a site or building is expected. Internal decision
makers and/or external law enforcement and intelligence
agencies determine the threat is credible.
High
The likelihood of a threat, weapon, and tactic being used
against a site or building is possible. Internal decision makers
and/or external law enforcement and intelligence agencies
determine the threat is known, but is not verified.
Medium
The likelihood of a threat, weapon, and tactic being used in the
region or against the site or building is negligible. Internal
decision makers and/or external law enforcement and
intelligence agencies determine the threat is non-existent or
extremely unlikely.
Low
Table 4-7 Human Caused Threat Rating Results
Human Caused Threat Rating
Agro-Terrorism Low
Aircraft as a weapon Low
Biological Attack Low
Chemical Agent/Toxic Inhalation Release Low
Civil Disorder High
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
24| Page
Human Caused Threat Rating
Conventional Attack Medium
Major Crime Very High
Cyber Attack Very High
Hostage/Assassin Low
IED Medium
Nuclear Attack/Acts of War Low
Radiological Dispersion Device Low
Sabotage/Theft Medium
Terrorism Medium
Vehicle Born IED Medium
Workplace Violence Very High
4.5 Threats and Hazards of Most Concern
The prioritization process resulted in a pared down listing of natural, technological, and human
caused hazards/threats of most concern to the City of Palo Alto and its local partners. These are
presented in Table 3-8 Summary of All Hazards Prioritization.
To complete the THIRA process, we researched each of these hazards/threats to develop a more
complete understanding of their characteristics. Section 5 presents detailed hazard and threat
profiles.
Table 4-8 Summary of All Hazards Prioritization
Threats and Hazards of Most Concern
Natural Technological Intentional (Human-caused)
Earthquake Airplane Accident Major Crime
Flood Hazardous Waste/
Materials Spill Cyber Attack
Severe Storm Urban Fire Workplace Violence
Civil Disorder
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
25| Page
5 Hazard Profiles
In this chapter of the 2017 Update, changes are highlighted to reflect new or modified
information.
This section contains profiles detailing the characteristics of the hazards of most concern.
5.1 Non-Natural Hazard Profile Structure
Technological and human caused threats and hazards require a different approach to evaluating
likelihood and potential impacts as compared to natural hazards. With natural hazards, as done
in the local hazard mitigation planning process, an evaluation is based on past occurrences,
weather patterns, geography, and other relevant earth science. Technological and human caused
threats and hazards are not dependent upon earth science and do not occur with regular
patterns. For that reason, a modified approach is appropriate for evaluating the potential of
technological and human caused threats and hazards.
Each technological or human caused hazard profile contains the following components:
Application Mode: describing the human act(s) or unintended event(s) necessary to cause the
hazard to occur.
Duration: the anticipated length of time the hazard is present on the target. For example, the
duration of an earthquake may be just seconds, but a chemical warfare agent such as mustard
gas, if un-remediated, can persist for days or weeks under the right conditions.
Dynamic/Static Characteristic: describing the hazard’s tendency, or that of its effects, to
either expand, contract, or remain confined in time, magnitude, and space. For example, the
physical destruction caused by an earthquake is generally confined to the place in which it
occurs, and it does not usually get worse unless there are aftershocks or other cascading failures;
in contrast, a cloud of chlorine gas leaking from a storage tank can change location by drifting
with the wind and can diminish in danger by dissipating over time.
Mitigating Conditions: characteristics of the target and its physical environment that can
reduce the effects of a hazard. For example, earthen berms can provide protection from bombs;
exposure to sunlight can render some biological agents ineffective; and effective perimeter
lighting and surveillance can minimize the likelihood of someone approaching a target unseen.
Exacerbating Conditions: characteristics that can enhance or magnify the effects of a
hazard. For example, depressions or low areas in terrain can trap heavy vapors, and
proliferation of street furniture (trash receptacles, newspaper vending machines, mail boxes,
etc) can provide concealment opportunities for explosive devises.
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
26| Page
5.2 Earthquake Hazard Summary
Past land use decisions in Palo Alto have not always taken hazards into consideration. Moreover,
older buildings and infrastructure reflect the construction and engineering standards of their
era, which in most cases fall short of current standards for seismic safety. As a result, a portion
of the City, including 130 soft story structures, would be at some risk in the event of a major
earthquake. The greatest hazards are associated with fault rupture and ground shaking,
although liquefaction hazards are significant in the area east of Highway 101 due to the porous
nature and high water content of the soil. Landslides, a hazard that is common in the foothills of
Palo Alto, may result from heavy rain, erosion, removal of vegetation, or human activities.
Settlement and subsidence due to groundwater withdrawal has historically been a problem in
the southern and eastern areas of the City of Palo Alto, but has been largely halted by
groundwater recharge efforts and reduced pumping. Seismically-induced flooding is a hazard
due to the possibility of dam failure at Felt Lake and Searsville Lake and the potential for levee
failure near the San Francisco Bay.
To help mitigate the damages that may result from a potential earthquake, Palo Alto strictly
enforces uniform building code seismic safety restrictions and provides incentives for seismic
retrofits of structures in the University Avenue/Downtown area. The City also allows
development rights achieved through seismic upgrading of specified sites to be transferred to
designated eligible receiver sites per Program N - 71 in the Comprehensive Plan and per the Palo
Alto Municipal Code, Section 18.18.080. Palo Alto has completed seismic improvements to
facilities and critical infrastructure as part of its mitigation planning, including City Hall, library
buildings, the Art Center, and water reservoirs among others. The City will also benefit from the
San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Water System Improvement Program that is 80
percent complete and will provide seismic upgrades to the water distribution system serving
Palo Alto (http://www.sfwater.org/index.aspx?page=114).
Some parts of Palo Alto are at greater risk during a natural disaster than others. These areas
could be zoned or otherwise regulated to reduce their development potential and require
detailed geologic and engineering studies prior to development. The City already requires
geologic and soils investigations for development southwest of Interstate 280. Similar
requirements should be explored in other areas of the City prone to severe geologic hazards.
5.3 Flood Hazard Summary (Inclusive of Severe Storms)
Flood hazards, including tidal flooding from overtopping of coastal levees during extreme high
tide events in the Bay and fluvial flooding from creeks overflowing their banks, are likely to
continue to occur in Palo Alto. Severe storms, which generate large amounts of rain and heavy
winds, can result in flooding.
As noted in the 2017 LHMP, the City minimizes exposure to flood hazards through its
participation in the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP). FEMA makes NFIP flood insurance available to Palo Alto residents
and businesses as a result of the City’s adoption of required floodplain management regulations
into its Municipal Code (Chapter 16.52) that promote public health, safety and general welfare
and minimize damages due to flood conditions. City staff reviews proposed development in
flood prone areas and enforces the floodplain management regulations for specified building
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
27| Page
activity in Special Flood Hazard Areas, as depicted on FEMA’s Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRMs). In 1990, the City created an independent enterprise fund to fund needed
improvements to the storm drain system with revenue generated through user fees and
developed a Storm Drain Master Plan in 1993 to identify and prioritize a set of projects to
increase system capacity and reduce the incidence of street flooding. Property owners approved
a ballot measure in 2005 to increase the City’s monthly storm drain fee and thereby provided
funding to implement a set of seven high-priority capital improvement projects to upgrade the
storm drain system. All of the storm drain capital improvement projects specified in the ballot
measure will be completed by the end of FY 2017. Also, the City updated the Storm Drain
Master Plan in FY 2015 to identify and prioritize a new set of storm drain capital improvement
projects to address remaining capacity deficiencies in the City’s storm drain system.
The City has long been a partner with the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) who
constructed channel upgrades (100-year flood protection) in the 1980’s and 1990’s to reduce
flood risks from Adobe, Matadero, and Barron Creeks. San Francisquito Creek remains a
substantial flood risk to the community, along with tidal flooding during extreme high tide
events. Following the historic 1998 flood, five local agencies from two counties (the cities of
Palo Alto, Menlo Park, and East Palo Alto, the County of San Mateo Flood Control District, and
the Santa Clara Valley Water District) formed the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers
Authority (SFCJPA) to plan, design, and implement flood, environmental, and recreational
projects. Specifically, the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority is developing a
comprehensive regional plan for the San Francisquito Creek watershed that will improve the
level of flood protection to Palo Alto and surrounding communities. The SFCJPA’s initial capital
project, currently under construction in conjunction with the City of Palo Alto, is designed to
increase creek flow capacity to protect people and property from fluvial flooding along a critical
urban section of the creek between Highway 101 and San Francisco Bay.
Several other flood control projects are also planned upstream of this creek to further reduce
riverine flood risks. These projects are also listed in the 2017 LHMP as mitigation actions.
Palo Alto, along with the entire Bay Area, is also subject to increasing flood risk as a result of
rising sea levels, requiring city planners to collaborate with regional organizations and projects,
such as the SCVWD, SFCJPA, the US Army Corps of Engineers’ South San Francisco Bay
Shoreline Study, and the State Coastal Conservancy Salt Pond Restoration Project, who have
each initiated studies on impacts of sea level rise in the vicinity of Palo Alto.
Palo Alto is also partnering with the SFCJPA in the Strategy to Advance Flood protection,
Ecosystems and Recreation along San Francisco Bay (SAFER Bay) to evaluate infrastructure
alternatives to protect Menlo Park, East Palo Alto, and Palo Alto against extreme tides with sea
level rise, and enhance shoreline habitat and trails. The initial feasibility study is underway on
this project.
5.4 Airplane Accident Profile
Aircraft accidents in Palo Alto can result from an aircraft experiencing trouble or from mid-air
collisions between aircraft flying over or near Palo Alto as they approach the three Bay Area
Airports (San Francisco, Oakland, and San Jose), as well as Moffett Field. In February 2010, a
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
28| Page
small aircraft left the Palo Alto Airport and collided with power lines, causing a City-wide power
outage. The Palo Alto electrical utility feedpoint to PG&E (and the grid) is a single point, near
the airport. The City is exploring a secondary connection.
Application mode: Aviation accidents may be caused by problems originating from
mechanical difficulties, pilot error, or acts of terrorism. Extreme weather conditions may also
increase the potential of an accident. Airplane accidents can result from major aircraft
experiencing trouble while in flight or from mid-air collisions between aircraft flying over or
near Palo Alto. There is also the potential for this type of accident to occur over water.7
Duration: An airplane accident can occur in an instant and without notice, or could be
reported but not remediated, lasting a few hours. Clean up after an accident could take days to
weeks. Longer term actions include repairing any buildings and infrastructure that may have
been damaged due to the accident and investigating the cause of the incident.
Dynamic/static characteristics: The number of fatalities/injuries and the area damaged by
the aircraft accident can vary depending on the type and magnitude of the accident. While
damage may be concentrated to the location of the incident, secondary impacts from the
accident, such as explosion and fire, as well as debris and hazardous materials, could spread
from the initial area of impact.
Mitigating conditions: The City’s Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) outlines a response plan
to airplane accidents. The EOP also notes that consequences of an airplane accident from a
small aircraft associated with Palo Alto airport would be low. Issues in responding to the
February 2010 incident were identified in an After Action Report. These issues have been
addressed to provide better response to a potential future incident.
Exacerbating conditions: The City of Palo Alto lies between two international airports, San
Jose and San Francisco. Within the boundaries of Palo Alto, Santa Clara County operates the
Palo Alto Municipal Airport, a general aviation airport. There is potential for an accident to
occur in the air or on the ground near these locations as well as over water in Palo Alto’s
jurisdiction. The City currently does not have a water rescue team to respond to this type of
accident and would need to rely on outside response resources. An accident occurring in a
residential neighborhood and/or highly dense area of the City exacerbates consequences
because of the possible increase in fatalities and damage to structures in these areas as opposed
to in more rural or open spaces.
5.5 Hazardous Waste/Materials Spill Profile
Hazardous waste/materials are widely used or created at facilities such as hospitals, wastewater
treatment plants, universities and industrial/manufacturing warehouses. Several household
products such as cleaning supplies and paint are also considered hazardous materials and can be
found in households and stores. Hazardous materials include:
• Explosives;
7 City of Palo Alto EOP (2007)
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
29| Page
• Flammable, non-flammable, and poison gas;
• Flammable liquids;
• Flammable, spontaneously combustible, and dangerous when wet solids;
• Oxidizers and organic peroxides;
• Poisons and infectious substances;
• Radioactive materials; and
• Corrosive materials.8
The release of a hazardous material to the environment could cause a multitude of problems.
Although these incidents can happen almost anywhere, certain areas of the City are at higher
risk, such as near roadways that are frequently used for transporting hazardous materials and
locations with industrial facilities that use, store, or dispose of such materials. Areas crossed by
railways, waterways, airways, and pipelines also have increased potential for mishaps.
Incidences can occur during production, storage, transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials. Communities can be at risk if a chemical is used unsafely or released in harmful
amounts into the environment. Hazardous materials can cause death, serious injury, long-
lasting health effects, and damage to buildings, the environment, homes, and other property.9
Application mode: Hazardous waste/materials spills may be accidental or intentional, and
may occur at fixed facilities or on vehicles.
Accidental Hazardous Waste/Materials Spill
Hazardous materials accidents can range from a chemical spill on a highway to groundwater
contamination by naturally occurring methane gas to a household hazardous materials
accident.10 Potential hazards can occur during any stage of use from production and storage to
transportation, use or disposal. Production and storage occurs in chemical plants, gas stations,
hospitals, and many other sites. There are many reasons an unintentional hazardous
waste/materials spill may occur. Some of these include:
• Malfunction of equipment
• Natural disaster
8 National Archives and Records Administration, “Code of Federal Regulations Title 49:
Transportation” (July 1 2012), http://ecfr/gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-
idx?c=ecfr;sid=54f867044f1c9e1af52443eb305e1360;rgn=div5;view=text;node=49%3A2.1.1.3.7
;idno=49;cc=ecfr
9 City of Palo Alto EOP; Santa Clara County 2011 LHMP
10 University of Idaho Cooperative Extension System,
http://www.uiweb.uidaho.edu/disaster/haz/hazmat.html
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
30| Page
• Accidents caused by humans11
Intentional Fixed Facility Hazardous Waste/Materials Spill
Hazardous material spills at fixed facilities may be internal or external to the facility. External
releases may involve industrial storage, fires, or malicious acts. External releases may create
airborne plumes of chemical, biological, or radiological elements that can affect a wide area and
last for hours or days. Internal releases occur inside buildings and can be caused by a chemical
spill or release of a biological or radiological agent. Internal releases can affect all occupants of a
building, particularly if the material is distributed throughout the building through the
heating/ventilation system.12
Intentional hazardous material releases at fixed facilities might include:
• Deliberate release of a hazardous substance by an employee of a facility that stores or
uses hazardous materials or produces hazardous waste;
• Deliberate release of a hazardous substance into the water supply
• Detonation of a “dirty bomb” – an explosive device containing radiological or biological
substances that are released into the air upon explosion;
• Redirection of toxic waste into water supply or ventilation system; and
• Delivery or placement of a hazardous material inside a building.
Intentional Mobile Hazardous Waste/Materials Spill
Intentional mobile releases may include:
• Release of a chemical, biological, or radiological agent from a moving vehicle or train;
• Use of a vehicle as a dirty bomb, i.e. crashing a vehicle filled with hazardous materials
into a structure or building or exploding the vehicle;
• Targeting commercial/industrial chemical containers transported in bulk by both road
and rail;
• Release of hazardous materials from airplanes over densely populated areas; and
• Release of hazardous materials into water from a boat.
Duration: Accidental hazardous waste/materials spills can be reported immediately following
the spill, thus reducing the amount of time the spill is left uncontained. Most hazardous
11 Innovateus, “What is a Chemical Spill?”, http://www.innovateus.net/earth-matters/what-
chemical-spill
12 US Air Force, “Protective Actions for a Hazardous Material Release”, (22 October 2001),
Http://emc.ornl.gov/CSEPPweb/data/Reports/Misc.%20Reports/HAZMAT.pdf
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
31| Page
waste/materials spills occur with little or no warning, and can be difficult to detect until
symptoms present themselves to those affected.13 External releases may create airborne plumes
of chemical, biological, or radiological elements that can affect a wide area and last for hours or
days. Internal releases will most likely require evacuation of a facility for hours to days. Both
external and internal releases require extensive clean-up efforts, lasting from days to months
depending on the type and magnitude of the spill.
Dynamic/static characteristics: Both mobile and external hazardous materials releases can
spread and affect a wide area, through the release of plumes of chemical, biological or
radiological elements, or leaks, or spills. Conversely, internal releases are more likely to be
confined to the structure the material is stored in.
Chemicals may be corrosive or otherwise damaging over time. A hazardous materials release
could also result in fire or explosion. Contamination may be carried out of the incident area by
people, vehicles, wind, and water.14
Hazardous material releases are dynamic and may vary depending on the following factors:
• Type and amount of agent released;
• Environmental conditions – The micro-meteorological effects of the buildings and
terrain can influence the travel of agents15;
• Location of release (urban vs. rural, water vs. air); and
• Remediation time, dependent on a locality’s or facility’s hazardous material release
preparedness programs.
Mitigating conditions: Facilities that store hazardous materials are reported to local and
federal governments. Security measures at these facilities can be heightened. Many facilities
have their own hazardous materials guides and response plans, including transportation
companies who transport hazardous materials.
The City’s EOP includes an annex identifying the actions and agencies involved in responding to
a hazardous materials incident. The City of Palo Alto Fire Department administers the County’s
hazardous materials emergency planning and community right-to-know program. They also
maintain Hazardous Materials Business Plans for every business in the City that handles a
hazardous material in quantities above the State’s reporting threshold. The City inspects and
issues annual permits to approximately 500 businesses with annual hazardous materials
permits that necessitate monitoring and inspection.
13 US Air Force, “Protective Actions for a Hazardous Material Release”, (22 October 2001),
Http://emc.ornl.gov/CSEPPweb/data/Reports/Misc.%20Reports/HAZMAT.pdf
14 FEMA, “Primer to Design Safe School Projects in Case of Terrorist Attacks,” FEMA 428,
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/plan/prevent/rms/428/fema428_ch1.pdf
15 FEMA, “Primer to Design Safe School Projects in Case of Terrorist Attacks,” FEMA 428,
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/plan/prevent/rms/428/fema428_ch1.pdf
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
32| Page
In addition, the City of Palo Alto provides safe hazardous waste disposal for residents and small
businesses at a specified Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) Station. Their HHW Program
educates the public about the safe use, storage, disposal, and alternatives to hazardous products.
Exacerbating conditions: Palo Alto has the potential for a variety of incidents involving
hazardous materials. There are two major areas of high-tech businesses and numerous small
businesses that use hazardous materials. The two major areas of high-tech businesses include
the Stanford Research Park (about one mile square in area) just south of Stanford University,
and the industrial area (about ¼ mile square in area) adjacent to US 101 in south Palo Alto. The
Fire Department keeps information on the materials used in these areas. Accidental releases
from any user could occur; this presents a danger due to the close proximity of some users to
neighborhoods, schools, and other sensitive populations. Staff is currently working on
enhancements to existing notification plans and systems. Stanford University, surrounded on
three sides by Palo Alto, also uses a variety of hazardous materials in its many labs. The Palo
Alto Fire Department provides fire suppression and paramedic services under contract to the
University. However, Santa Clara County administers the hazardous materials management
plan for the University. Information on these labs is kept on location outside each lab.
Within the City there are two freeways and a railroad that may be used to transport hazardous
materials. Areas and people within one mile of a highway, railroad, or industrial area are
considered potentially at risk from a hazardous materials release. This includes everyone in
Palo Alto except for a few homes in the remote foothills. Palo Alto’s two major freeways are US
101 to the east and Interstate 280 to the west. US 101 carries the most commercial traffic. The
railroad runs between these freeways through the heart of the City. The Palo Alto Airport, the
potential for the aerial spraying of pesticides, and the high volume of air traffic in the area also
place Palo Alto at a potential risk from a hazardous materials incident involving aircraft.
Although Palo Alto does not use wells for its primary drinking water, pollution of the aquifer is
also a concern.
5.6 Urban Fire Profile
The entire City of Palo Alto is at risk to major fires impacting a section of the City or a large
complex. The City has over 25,000 housing units and a significant business base. The
proximity of structures to each other within the City creates additional exposure to widespread
urban fire. Localized, single-structure fires sometimes occur in Palo Alto. As of November
2013, the City had experienced three urban fires during the previous three months. Major
uncontrolled fires are a possibility, but rarely occur.16
Application mode: Urban fires can be accidentally caused through human error including
cooking accidents, smoking, or unsafe use of woodstoves or space heaters. Malfunctioning
electrical equipment is also a major cause of fire in urban areas.17 Fires originating in the
Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) also pose a threat as they can spread toward more developed
areas and cause significant damage to structures, residents, and natural resources. Arson, or the
16 City of Palo Alto EOP (2007)
17 National Fire Protection Association, (29 January 2013), Urban Fire Safety,
http://www.nfpa.org/safety-information/for-consumers/populations/urban-fire-safety
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
33| Page
deliberate burning of property, is also a possibility within City limits. Arson attacks may be
imposed upon structures, motor vehicles, wildland areas, or other “nonstructural” properties.
Duration: The duration of an urban fire is dependent on weather conditions, the magnitude of
the fire, and fire suppression resources. Structural fires could burn for several hours before
being fully contained.
Dynamic/static characteristics: Weather conditions (wind and warm, dry temperatures)
and the presence of fire fuel can cause fires to spread away from their source.
Mitigating conditions: In the event of a major urban fire, auto-aid and mutual-aid
agreements (with Cal FIRE) will be utilized, as outline in the Palo Alto Emergency Operations
Plan. The City strives to minimize exposure to wildland and urban fire hazards through rapid
emergency response, a sufficient water supply, proactive fire code enforcement, public
education programs, and adequate emergency management preparation.
To ensure a sufficient water supply, an emergency water supply and storage project, initiated in
2007, was primarily completed by the City in late 2013/early 2014. This project provides Palo
Alto with a self-sustaining emergency water supply through rehabilitating five City wells,
constructing three new wells, constructing a new 2.5 million gallon reservoir and associated
pump station and well, and upgrading an existing pump station (Mayfield Reservoir Pump
Station).
As part of the City’s emergency management preparation for wildland and urban fires, they
designed and implemented the Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan. This plan pertains to
the Palo Alto Foothills area west of the Foothills Expressway and Junipero Serra Boulevard,
which represents a Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) area. The plan addresses a broad range of
integrated activities and planning documents to identify and mitigate the impacts of fire hazards
in the Palo Alto Foothills Area. Fire mitigation project areas include the boundaries of Foothills
Park and Pearson-Arastradero Preserve.
In urban areas, arsonists may target abandoned buildings. Limiting the number of abandoned
buildings or providing security near these buildings may deter arsonists. Both structure and
wildland arson data can be analyzed to depict trends in copy cat arsonists as well as in weather
and fuel conditions. Documenting these trends in a reporting system may assist in mitigating
future cases.
Exacerbating conditions: Increasing development in the wildland-urban interface can
exacerbate the spread of a wildfire into developed areas, making these areas vulnerable. While
planning and mitigation to reduce the risk of fire in Palo Alto’s WUI area is controlled through
the Palo Alto Foothills Fire Management Plan, there is still potential a fire in this area could
impact the City’s public safety, cultural and economic activities, and environmental and natural
resource management.
5.7 Major Crimes
Major criminal incidents include shooting, homicide, and kidnapping crimes that include
multiple suspects or multiple victims and are considered an ongoing threat to the community.
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
34| Page
These types of crime have an ability to impact the community in such a way that can undermine
the quality of life within the Palo Alto community.
Application mode:
In the period between April 2014 and April 2016 Palo Alto recorded 3469 Part One offenses and
5737 Part Two offenses. The overall Part One and Part Two crime percentages during this
period are very similar to the preceding 2013 reporting period.
Figure 5-5-1 Statistics of Part I and Part II Crimes in Palo Alto April 2014-2017
For reporting purposes, criminal offenses are divided into two major groups: Part I offenses and
Part II offenses per the DOJ and FBI. Part I crimes comprise two categories: violent and
property crimes. Aggravated assault, forcible rape, murder, and robbery are classified as violent,
while arson, burglary, larceny-theft, and motor vehicle theft are classified as property crimes.
Part I crimes are collectively known as Index crimes, this name is used because the crimes are
considered quite serious, tend to be reported more reliably than others, and are reported
directly to the police. In Part II, the following categories are tracked: simple assault, curfew
offenses and loitering, embezzlement, forgery and counterfeiting, disorderly conduct, driving
under the influence, drug offenses, fraud, gambling, liquor offenses, offenses against the family,
prostitution, public drunkenness, runaways, sex offenses, stolen property, vandalism, vagrancy,
and weapons offenses.
This categorization is informative as it links to Palo Alto Police Department’s Fiscal Year 2013
Annual Report. “Crime in Palo Alto has seen an overall decrease in the past five years. Violent
crimes have continued to decrease, while property crimes have increased. The most notable is
PART ONE CRIMES
Burglary 41.22%
Petty Theft 37.35%
Grand Theft 13.21%
Stolen Vehicle 4.01%
Robbery 1.70%
Assault 0.87%
Battery 0.72%
Sexual Assault 0.49%
Arson 0.37%
Murder 0.03%
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
35| Page
the increase in Residential and Auto Burglaries. Fiscal Year 2013 saw a sharp increase in
residential burglaries. The Police Department responded with a directed enforcement campaign,
and an increased presence in high risk areas. A total of 79 suspects were arrested for burglary,
attempted burglary and other associated charges.”
Figure 5-2 Statistics of Part I and Part II Crimes in Palo Alto from the PaloAlso FIscal Year 2013 Annual
Report
Duration: A major crime may occur in a short amount of time, from seconds to hours, and it
usually occurs without immediate notice.
Dynamic/static characteristics: Major crimes can occur anywhere in the community.
Mitigating conditions: The Palo Alto Police Department and Stanford Department of Public
Safety participate in mutual aid and regional organizations to share information, capabilities,
and other resources to prevent major crimes from occurring. Additionally, increased 2013
staffing and effective training of Palo Alto Police Department personnel will likely have
deterrent effects.
Exacerbating conditions: Palo Alto businesses and residences are perceived as a soft target
resulting in increased property crimes by criminals who live outside Palo Alto. The increase of
such events increases the probability of a robbery going wrong resulting in a shooting or
homicide event.
5.8 Cyber Attack Profile
A cyber terrorist can infiltrate many institutions including banking, medical, education,
government, military, and communication and infrastructure systems. The majority of effective
malicious cyber-activity has become web-based. Recent trends indicate that hackers are
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
36| Page
targeting users to steal personal information and moving away from targeting computers by
causing system failure.18
Application mode: Common types of cyber attacks are summarized in Table 4-1 Common
Types of Cyber Attacks19
Table 5-1 Common Types of Cyber Attacks
Type of Attack Description
Denial of service
A method of attack from a single source that denies
system access to legitimate users by overwhelming the
target computer with messages and blocking legitimate
traffic. It can prevent a system from being able to
exchange data with other systems or use the internet.
Botnet A collection of compromised machines (bots) under
(unified) control of an attacker (botmaster).
Distributed denial of service
A variant of the denial-of-service attack that uses a
coordinated attack from a distributed system of
computers rather than from a single source. It often
makes use of worms to spread to multiple computers that
can then attack the target.
Exploit tools
Publicly available and sophisticated tools that intruders
of various skill levels can use to determine vulnerabilities
and gain entry into targeted systems.
Logic bombs
A form of sabotage in which a programmer inserts code
that causes the program to perform a destructive action
when some triggering event occurs, such as terminating
the programmer’s employment.
Phishing
The creation and use of e-mails and Web sites—designed
to look like those of well-known legitimate businesses,
financial institutions, and government agencies—in order
to deceive Internet users into disclosing their personal
data, such as bank and financial account information and
passwords. The phishers then take that information and
18 Symantec, “Internet Security Threat Report” Volume 17 (2011),
www.symantec.com/threatreport
19 United States Government Accountability Office, “Critical Infrastructure Protection:
Department of Homeland Security Faces Challenges in Fulfilling Cybersecurity
Responsibilities”, Report #GAO-05-434 (May 2005), www.gao.gov/new.items/d05434.pdf
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
37| Page
Type of Attack Description
use it for criminal purposes, such as identity theft and
fraud.
Sniffer
Synonymous with packet sniffer. A program that
intercepts routed data and examines each packet in
search of specified information, such as passwords
transmitted in clear text.
Trojan horse
A computer program that conceals harmful code. A
Trojan horse usually masquerades as a useful program
that a user would wish to execute.
Virus
A program that infects computer files, usually executable
programs, by inserting a copy of itself into the file. These
copies are usually executed when the infected file is
loaded into memory, allowing the virus to infect other
files. Unlike the computer worm, a virus requires human
involvement (usually unwitting) to propagate.
War dialing Simple programs that dial consecutive telephone
numbers looking for modems.
War driving
A method of gaining entry into wireless computer
networks using a laptop, antennas, and a wireless
network adaptor that involves patrolling locations to gain
unauthorized access.
Worm
An independent computer program that reproduces by
copying itself from one system to another across a
network. Unlike computer viruses, worms do not require
human involvement to propagate.
One of the difficulties of malicious cyber activity is that its origin could be virtually anyone,
virtually anywhere. Table 4-2 Common Sources of Cybersecurity Threats summarizes common
sources of cybersecurity threats.20
Table 5-2 Common Sources of Cybersecurity Threats
Threat Description
Bot-network operators Bot-network operators are hackers; however, instead of
breaking into systems for the challenge or bragging rights,
20 United States Government Accountability Office, “Critical Infrastructure Protection:
Department of Homeland Security Faces Challenges in Fulfilling Cybersecurity
Responsibilities”, Report #GAO-05-434 (May 2005), www.gao.gov/new.items/d05434.pdf
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
38| Page
Threat Description
they take over multiple systems in order to coordinate
attacks and to distribute phishing schemes, spam, and
malware attacks. The services of these networks are
sometimes made available on underground markets (e.g.,
purchasing a denial-of-service attack, servers to relay
spam or phishing attacks, etc.).
Criminal groups
Criminal groups seek to attack systems for monetary gain.
Specifically, organized crime groups are using spam,
phishing, and spyware/malware to commit identity theft
and online fraud. International corporate spies and
organized crime organizations also pose a threat to the
United States through their ability to conduct industrial
espionage and large-scale monetary theft and to hire or
develop hacker talent.
Foreign intelligence services
Foreign intelligence services use cyber tools as part of
their information-gathering and espionage activities. In
addition, several nations are aggressively working to
develop information warfare doctrine, programs, and
capabilities. Such capabilities enable a single entity to
have a significant and serious impact by disrupting the
supply, communications, and economic infrastructures
that support military power—impacts that could affect the
daily lives of U.S. citizens across the country.
Hackers
Hackers break into networks for the thrill of the challenge
or for bragging rights in the hacker community. While
remote cracking once required a fair amount of skill or
computer knowledge, hackers can now download attack
scripts and protocols from the Internet and launch them
against victim sites. Thus, while attack tools have become
more sophisticated, they have also become easier to use.
According to the Central Intelligence Agency, the large
majority of hackers do not have the requisite expertise to
threaten difficult targets such as critical U.S. networks.
Nevertheless, the worldwide population of hackers poses a
relatively high threat of an isolated or brief disruption
causing serious damage.
Insiders
The disgruntled organization insider is a principal source
of computer crime. Insiders may not need a great deal of
knowledge about computer intrusions because their
knowledge of a target system often allows them to gain
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
39| Page
Threat Description
unrestricted access to cause damage to the system or to
steal system data. The insider threat also includes
outsourcing vendors as well as employees who
accidentally introduce malware into systems.
Phishers
Individuals, or small groups, that execute phishing
schemes in an attempt to steal identities or information
for monetary gain. Phishers may also use spam and
spyware/malware to accomplish their objectives.
Spammers
Individuals or organizations that distribute unsolicited e-
mail with hidden or false information in order to sell
products, conduct phishing schemes, distribute
spyware/malware, or attack organizations (i.e., denial of
service).
Spyware/malware authors
Individuals or organizations with malicious intent carry
out attacks against users by producing and distributing
spyware and malware. Several destructive computer
viruses and worms have harmed files and hard drives,
including the Melissa Macro Virus, the Explore.Zip worm,
the CIH (Chernobyl) Virus, Nimda, Code Red, Slammer,
and Blaster.
Cyber-Terrorists
Cyber-Terrorists seek to destroy, incapacitate, or exploit
critical infrastructures in order to threaten national
security, cause mass casualties, weaken economies or
target businesses, and damage public morale and
confidence. Cyber-Terrorists may use phishing schemes or
spyware/malware in order to generate funds or gather
sensitive information.
Given its location in Silicon Valley, Palo Alto is home to many large companies that could be
subject to a cyber attack.
Duration: The duration of a cyber attack is dependent on the complexity of the attack, how
widespread it is, how quickly the attack is detected, and the resources available to aid in
restoring the system.
Dynamic/static characteristics: A cyber attack could be geared toward one organization,
one type of infrastructure and/or a specific geographical area. The affected area could range
from small to large scale.
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
40| Page
Cyber attacks generated toward large corporations can negatively affect the economy. The
Congressional Research Service study (2008) found the economic impact of cyber attacks on
businesses has grown to over $226 billion annually.21
Attacks geared toward critical infrastructure and hospitals can result in the loss of life and the
loss of basic needs, such as power and water, to the general public. Cyber attacks can also lead
to the loss of operational capacity.
Mitigating conditions: Palo Alto has three levels of security to prevent cyber attacks:
1. A Symantech anti-virus protection for desktops and laptops;
2. Malware Protection Systems for Web and email systems; and
3. A Barracuda Firewall for the IT Network.
In addition, the City is in the process of deploying a vulnerability management system to better
protect the IT network.
Access control to buildings, such as ID cards and badges, can help regulate the people who have
access to an agency’s or corporations’ cyber network. Palo Alto information technology network
locations include access control measures to prevent unauthorized access to these controlled
areas.
The City has an Energy Assurance Plan that focuses on minimizing energy interruptions during
emergencies. This plan could be updated to include a contingency plan for keeping energy
lifelines online given a cyber attack. Currently, the North American Electric Reliability
Corporation (NERC) is responsible for ensuring energy industry compliance with Critical
Infrastructure Protection (CIP) standards. These rules require organizations that deliver bulk
electricity to the North American power grid to identify and protect critical cyber assets. In
addition, bulk power suppliers must define methods, processes, and procedures for securing
critical cyber assets. “Cyber assets” are loosely defined as all “programmable electronic devices
and communication networks including hardware, software, and data.22
Exacerbating conditions: Humans are the weakest link in a chain of cyber security. It
remains difficult to continuously monitor and manage human/operator vulnerability. However,
to address this weakness the City has deployed an online security training program which all
employees are required to complete annually.
5.9 Workplace Violence Profile
Workplace violence is violence or the threat of violence against workers. It includes any act or
threat of physical violence, harassment, intimidation, or other threatening disruptive behavior
that occurs at the worksite. It can occur at or outside the workplace and can range from threats
and verbal abuse to physical assaults and homicide. It can affect and involve employees, clients,
21 Defense Tech. http://defensetech.org/2008/10/20/the-cyber-attack-danger/
22 NextLabs. http://www.nextlabs.com/html/?q=nerc-and-ferc-cyber-security-standards
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
41| Page
customers, and visitors. Workplace violence includes locations such as churches, malls, etc. and
may be the result of a person acting alone.23
Application mode: Workplace violence can range from threats and verbal abuse to physical
assaults and homicide. These incidents can be caused by fellow employees, by employers, or by
external clients.
Duration: Acts of workplace violence could be a onetime incident or could occur repetitively
over time, lasting weeks to years.
Dynamic/static characteristics: Workplace violence can occur at or outside the workplace.
Mitigating conditions: Many companies have established workplace violence prevention
programs and offer trainings on workplace violence including how to identify it and mitigate it.
Providing a secure workplace that has video surveillance, extra lighting, and alarm systems may
minimize access to outsiders.
Exacerbating conditions: Some workers are at increased risk to workplace violence. Among
them are workers who exchange money with the public; deliver passengers, goods, or services;
or work alone or in small groups, during late night or early morning hours, in high-crime areas,
or in community settings and homes where they have extensive contact with the public. As with
sabotage, social media such as Twitter and Facebook may be a means of exacerbating workplace
bullying and violence.
5.10 Civil Disorder
Civil disorder refers to unrest caused by a group of people and may include terrorist activities.
Public demonstrations have the potential to lead to looting and rioting. There are many
potential causes for civil disorder including: animal rights, labor disputes, civil rights, campus
related issues, abortion rights, neighboring jurisdictions, political issues, events (sports, music,
etc.), and spontaneous miscellaneous events. Potential consequences from acts of civil disorder
include: disruptions of police and city services, closure of roads, rioting, property damage, and
injuries to protesters, police officers, and uninvolved parties.
Application mode: Over the past two years, Palo Alto has seen a number of civil disturbances
spawned by events from across the Country including the 2014 Ferguson, Missouri riots,
internationally motivated riots against Hewlett Packard, and the 2016 National Elections and
Inauguration. These incidents were primarily peaceful however some had disruptive impacts on
the community.
Duration: Civil disturbances typically last for several hours, but the duration can be extended
to days.
Dynamic/static characteristics: Civil disturbances can occur anywhere in and around Palo
Alto and are usually outside established facilities.
23 US Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Act, www.OSHA.gov
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
42| Page
Mitigating conditions: No long-term mitigation actions can attempt to reduce the occurrence
or impacts from future civil disturbances. However, proactive situational awareness to identify
planned events can lead to proactive and beneficial dialogue with event planners to minimize
the impacts on the community.
Exacerbating conditions: Manmade facilities, such as homes, businesses, and other essential
infrastructure, such as dams, utilities sites, and other public common areas are vulnerable to
civil disturbance because civil violence, by its very nature, is most often directed at objects that
reflect civil values - property, industry, and services. As such, the manmade environment would
receive a high impact and vulnerability rating. Palo Alto houses many high-profile international
corporations, which could be potentially targeted.
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 43| Page
6 Conclusion
The City of Palo Alto and its local partners should be commended for the tremendous
capabilities currently available to prevent, protect against, mitigate, respond to, and recover
from hazards and threats. One invaluable strength of the City’s emergency management
program is the ongoing coordination with local partners. Emergency planning, training, and
exercises are conducted in partnership with Stanford University, Stanford Hospital, neighboring
jurisdictions, community members, and other pertinent organizations such as the American Red
Cross.
Communications technology within the City is fairly robust. Mass notification systems are in
place. Responders and emergency managers will use the highest level of communication
technology available during/immediately following an incident. Communications and
notification systems are both for public safety agencies and the general public. There are a wide
range of communications options. Stanford University employs an Outdoor Warning System
(PA and sirens) for emergency alerts/notifications, but such a system does not exist in Palo Alto.
Stanford University and the City of Palo Alto have interoperable dispatch systems. A Mobile
Emergency Operations Center (MEOC) is available to enable communication coordination
should the primary EOC be compromised. Social media will be an asset for receiving
information from the public regarding attacks and impacts. KZSU, the Stanford radio station, is
an available resource that can be taken over from Palo Alto City Hall to provide supplemental
information, beyond and more-local than what might be available on other broadcast stations
via the Emergency Alert System (EAS). Certain businesses have two-way radio communications
within their neighborhood and to the City EOC. WebEOC enables efficient dissemination of
incident management information across local government agencies throughout the Operational
Area. Finally, the growth of social media tools is a resource to Palo Alto and Stanford.
Opportunities for residents and members of the public to contribute to the City’s resiliency are
bountiful. The Emergency Services Volunteer program provides supplemental resources to the
professional first responders and facilitates means for neighbors to help neighbors (including
businesses and other entities). This organization includes several City-sponsored emergency
preparedness volunteer programs:
• Neighborhood and Block Preparedness Coordinator program
• Palo Alto CERT Program
• Palo Alto Auxiliary Communications Services: ARES/RACES
• Palo Alto Medical Reserve Corps
In addition to these formal opportunities for community members to receive training and assist
through specific roles, "see something, say something" campaigns are helpful in maintaining
vigilance throughout the City. Public education occurs via the Office of Emergency Services
presence on the web (www.cityofpaloalto.org/publicsafety), providing emergency preparedness
presentations to the “whole community”, and through the use of semi-annual utility bill inserts.
The City of Palo Alto conducts an annual community exercise to educate the public on disaster
preparedness and how to make a plan of action.
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 44| Page
Several policies and organizational processes are in place for the City government to achieve
long term resiliency. Examples include the zoning ordinance and building code enforcing safe
development. Critical Infrastructure and Key Resources (CIKR) sites are tagged in the new
Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) system for Palo Alto, Stanford University Campus, Los Altos &
Mountain View. Current planning efforts include an update to the Comprehensive Plan, a recent
Hazard Mitigation Plan, and this THIRA report. The established THIRA Executive Committee
may prove to be helpful in ongoing planning efforts beyond regular updates of this report.
Logistical resources available to the City include a small airport owned and operated by the City,
Moffett Federal Airfield, Stanford University Medical Center, schools, community centers, etc.
The Silicon Valley region is considered resource-rich with regard to the anticipated availability
of food in residences as well as skilled and willing volunteers to assist with recovery. Established
Mutual Aid may be called upon for additional resources. Points of Distribution sites are
established and exercised throughout Santa Clara County.
Much of the City’s resiliency and preparedness relies on actions taken by non-City agencies. For
example, schools are trained to handle active shooter situations. The Chamber of Commerce is a
strong resource for coordinating with small businesses. Stanford University Medical Center
conducts an annual hazard vulnerability analysis and maintains a mass fatality plan. The
Stanford Research Park follows protocols to alert/notify constituents of hazardous material
releases. Private sector Emergency Response Teams are established at many businesses in Palo
Alto. Caring residents and non-profit organizations serve as stewards of open space preserves.
The Palo Alto Historical Association has a listing of historical buildings.
Despite all of the commendable strengths in emergency management and community resiliency,
the THIRA Stakeholder Group identified numerous challenges toward further improvement. For
example, staff at key institutions such as Stanford University Medical Center and other
businesses may not be available following a catastrophic event due to transportation system
failure or the need to care for their families. That same problem, of course, may affect City staff.
Resources to respond to a significant event (including first responder professionals, and city
staff such as building inspectors) are severely limited. The current contracts and blanket
purchase orders are non-exclusive and may result in overlapping needs by multiple
jurisdictions/agencies. Following a significant event, personnel resources will be needed for
protecting medical supplies, routing traffic safely, etc.
Personal preparedness throughout the whole community can be improved. The City’s OES faces
a challenge of engaging new members of the community in emergency preparedness and
volunteer programs, in some part due to cultural differences and language barriers.
The Stakeholder Group identified that the business community should be more engaged in
emergency/resiliency planning. The local economy is susceptible to impacts from events such as
cybersecurity attacks or failure/breach of the fiber ring.
There is strong concern regarding infrastructure failure throughout the City including power,
telecommunications, water/wastewater distribution, and electric distribution. The Public Safety
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 45| Page
Building, housing the Emergency Operations Center and the 911 Center for Palo Alto and
Stanford, is of key concern, due to its long-known susceptibility to potential earthquake damage.
The neighboring counties and Stanford University use different alert systems and protocols for
disseminating information which creates a challenge for ensuring consistency in messaging for
the public following an event that crosses jurisdictional boundaries. Other concerns regarding
communications following an event include:
• Not all stakeholders have an easy way to report activities.
• Because of social media, the velocity of information, including false information/rumors,
is likely to outstrip local governments’ ability to stay on top of it.
• Communication systems that public safety relies upon may not be functional.
There is no current risk management system in place. Limited resources such as video cameras
and license plate readers are available for monitoring for security and protection of CIKR. The
City has access control systems for various city facilities but would benefit from improvements
to these current systems.
The City’s Office of Emergency Services has limited staffing resources to manage and maintain
the desired robust emergency management program. All identified hazards are not fully
evaluated in the City’s EOP or LHMP (e.g. Cyber Attack, Hostage/Assassin,
Sabotage/Crime/Theft, and Workplace Violence). It requires significant staff time to adequately
pre-plan for prevention, protection, mitigation, response and recovery including coordination
with numerous local, state, and federal agencies as well as whole community partners.
6.1 Recommendations for Action
Throughout the THIRA process, the Stakeholder Group and Executive Committee identified
many actions to improve capabilities for prevention, protection, mitigation, response, and
recovery. These recommendations are captured in Table 8-1. The list below has been modified
to summarize clear actionable items the City may prioritize and incorporate into ongoing
planning and budgeting processes.
Planning
• Update the City of Palo Alto Emergency Operations Plan and incorporate the identified
hazards as evaluated in this THIRA.
• Develop a detailed inventory of Critical Infrastructure and Key Resources (CIKR) among
Palo Alto and Stanford University that will foster improved planning for critical
infrastructure protection. Implement a plan to document risks to specified CIKR and
develop a strategy to mitigate these risks. This plan could include a template for CIKR
managers to conduct and document risk assessments for submission to the City of Palo
Alto.
• Explore sustainable solutions for energy assurance, including alternate energy for critical
facilities.
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 46| Page
• Promote Utilities Infrastructure improvements that mitigate/improve resiliency (power,
water, wastewater, gas).
• Continue to collaborate with regional planning efforts to mitigate impacts of sea level
rise / climate change.
• Implement an Infrastructure Management System – identified by IBRC.
• Conduct an updated assessment on the vulnerabilities of public safety communication
technologies and capabilities.
o Develop alternate communications capabilities to reduce reliance on commercial
carriers.
o Incorporate a city-wide public safety communications infrastructure assessment
and survey (including Stanford University and Stanford Hospital) to provide a
baseline capability to connect key facilities and nodes.
• Develop a Continuity of Operations/Continuity of Government Plan.
• Develop an emergency information technology plan, including business continuity and
disaster recovery (BCDR).
• Develop a supporting plan in conjunction with the Operational Area plan for mortuary
affairs, mass casualty, mass sheltering, points of distribution and points of dispensing
(mass prophylaxis) and other such regional activities.
• Encourage owners of CIKR to develop all hazard response plans and coordinate, where
applicable, support requirements with appropriate service providers.
• Develop a City of Palo Alto recovery plan including:
o pre-identified locations for FEMA trailers and field hospital/medical treatment
areas.
o plans for restoring basic health and social services functions following a
catastrophic event pre-identified alternative housing solutions for use following a
catastrophic event.
o an evaluation of options for expediting building permits following a catastrophic
event.
o resources available from the City of Palo Alto airport.
• Convene THIRA executive committee annually to review and update the THIRA.
Organization
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 47| Page
• Maintain an OES staff that is trained to develop, manage, and coordinate the
implementation of the Palo Alto family of emergency plans (EOP, COOP, HMP, THIRA,
etc.).
• Use the Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA) report to help
guide decisions related to prevention, protection, mitigation, response and recovery
related to threats that could affect the City.
• Implement a Joint Information System with North County stakeholders that will
improve public messaging during times of crises. Maintain trained staff to serve as local
alerting authorities consistent with the Integrated Public Alert and Warning system
(IPAWS).
• Maintain Palo Alto Emergency Services Volunteer , Stanford University volunteer
programs, Corporate Emergency Response Teams, and similar programs throughout the
community.
• Maintain participation in regional efforts to address remaining flood concerns, e.g., SFC
JPA, SCVWD, South San Francisco Bay Shoreline Study, Salt Pond Restoration Project.
• Implement a Multi-Agency Coordination (MAC) structure for storms/floods, public
works mutual aid, etc. Evaluate and improve coordination protocols within the
Operational Area, and with appropriate state and federal agencies.
• Bolster participation in the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center (NCRIC),
the Terrorism Liaison Officer (TLO) program, the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI),
and other means to share information among agencies, businesses, and partner
organizations.
• Establish an emergency resource directory and put in place advanced contracts for key
commodities or services identified during the planning, training, exercise process .
Equipment/Facilities
• Construct new Palo Alto Public Safety Building.
• Develop an Emergency Operations Staging Area (EOSA) to serve as a North County
staging area resource and to shelter the Palo Alto Mobile Emergency Operations Center
and other critical supplies.
• Improve video monitoring throughout the City of Palo Alto through collaboration and
coordination with privately owned video systems and city owned video systems.
• Increase access controls / physical security at critical city owned and operated facilities.
• Maintain at a high level of readiness emergency response vehicles and specialized
equipment required to respond to the threats and hazards listed in this report.
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 48| Page
• Acquire alternative energy and energy efficient equipment that will reduce fuel
requirements and ease overall logistical burdens.
• Upgrade creek stormwater monitoring systems to provide improved situational
awareness during storm events.
• Evaluate and implement a thermal sensors/camera network to cover the Wildland Urban
Interface (WUI).
• Coordinate with appropriate organizations to install battery backup systems on traffic
signals that increase public safety following a power outage scenario.
• Improve connectivity to partner EOCs and 911 PSAPs such as fiber, microwave, etc.
• Explore Video Teleconferencing (VTC) capabilities to link government and
nongovernment partners.
• Upgrade command and control software systems that improve communications,
collaboration, and situational awareness.
• Acquire base camp supplies and materials to sustain small response operations (30-50
responders) for events that occur in or around Palo Alto.
• Continue to participate in UASI CBRNE and HAZMAT equipment evaluation and
selection.
• Continue to evaluate feasibility of Regional Command Center at Moffett Field.
Training and Exercise
• Collaborate and regularly exercise with agencies/organizations referenced in the City’s
Emergency Operations Plan: Federal, State, agencies with a regional presence; Mutual
Aid Jurisdictions, Schools and Universities, Private Sector businesses, Not for Profit
organizations (Faith Based, Community Service); Hospitals & Health Care Facilities.
o Conduct training with other government agencies such as the FBI, State Dept.,
Secret Service, etc. to ensure collaborative processes and work through specific
scenario variables.
o Conduct collaborative planning, training and exercises with Caltrain and other
rail carriers operating in the area.
o Train and exercise road block/traffic diversion procedures such as in the vicinity
of Stanford Hospital and Stanford University.
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 49| Page
• Conduct training and exercises with private sector entities such as Stanford Industrial
Park, Stanford Shopping Center, etc.
• Regularly conduct ICS and EOC staff training per the Palo Alto EOC Staff Development
Program prioritizing high threat hazards
• Conduct employee information technology security and awareness training and exercise
a cyber security response effort with the information technology department as the
operations lead.
• Routinely conduct mass care and shelter training in coordination with American Red
Cross and City of Palo Alto partners.
Community Readiness
• Cultivate a culture of preparedness and community connection through efforts such as
outreach to public and private schools, Citizen Corps Council, City Staff and Volunteer
Disaster Service Worker training, and other “whole community” stakeholders.
o Continue to engage the business sector to improve their mitigation and
preparedness efforts; educate small businesses on the importance of resiliency
planning.
o Establish a goal for each family and business within the community to have an
adequate supply of water, food, etc.
o Pre-identify/establish public messaging campaigns that remind the community
of appropriate actions to a variety of potential hazard events (e.g. shelter in place,
evacuate, earthquake, flooding, etc.)
o Continue and improve promotion of family and business readiness to mitigate
service needs such as sheltering and mass care.
• Evaluate the potential for establishing a coordinating group for private airplane pilots (a
model exists in southern Santa Clara County) that could improve small-scale disaster
logistics operations.
6.2 THIRA Maintenance
The Palo Alto Office of Emergency Services (OES) will be responsible for reviewing this THIRA
report quarterly to make note of progress and/or items to update. Annually, the THIRA
Executive Committee will convene to discuss the progress and/or circumstances requiring
changes to the stated priorities. The annual Executive Committee meeting will culminate in a
summary memo prepared by OES and submitted to the City Council for consent as a matter of
public record.
Every two years the THIRA report will be updated and re-issued as a new version. On an
ongoing basis the THIRA report shall inform updates to the City’s Emergency Operations Plan.
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 50| Page
The THIRA report is For Official Use Only and is not available in its entirety to the public.
Questions regarding this report may be directed to OES at 650-617-3197.
City of Palo Alto THIRA 2017
A-1 | Page
7 Appendices
7.1 Appendix A: Planning Process
This THIRA report was developed through a comprehensive planning process which engaged
key City of Palo Alto and Stanford University leadership as well as a broader stakeholder group
representing the whole community. Following are summaries of the participants, meetings, and
workshops. Future updates to the THIRA may warrant expansion of the stakeholder roster and
modification of the planning process.
Resolution No. ____________
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adopting all of Volume 1 and the City of Palo Alto
portion of Volume 2 of the Santa Clara County Operational Hazard Mitigation Plan
WHEREAS, the Bay Area is subject to various earthquake‐related hazards such as
ground shaking, liquefaction, landsliding, fault surface rupture; and
WHEREAS, the Bay Area is subject to various weather‐related hazards including
wildfires, floods, and landslides; and
WHEREAS, the City of Palo Alto recognizes that disasters do not recognize city,
county, or special district boundaries; and
WHEREAS, the City of Palo Alto seeks to maintain and enhance both a disaster resistant
City of Palo Alto and region by reducing the potential loss of life, property damage, and∙
environmental degradation from natural disasters, while accelerating economic recovery from
those disasters; and
WHEREAS, the City of Palo Alto is committed to increasing the disaster resistance
of the infrastructure, health, housing, economy, government services, education, environment,
and land use systems in the City of Palo Alto, as well as in the Bay Area as a whole; and
WHEREAS, the federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires all cities, counties,
and special districts to have adopted a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan to receive disaster
mitigation funding from FEMA; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Palo Alto does RESOLVE as follows:
SECTION 1. Adoption. Adopts in its entirety, Volume I and the introduction, chapter 12 the City
of Palo Alto jurisdictional annex, and the appendices of Volume II of the Santa Clara County Operational
Area Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP).
SECTION 2. That the City of Palo Alto commits to continuing to take those actions and
initiating further actions, as deemed appropriate by its City Council, officers, and employees,
identified in the City of Palo Alto Annex of that multi‐jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan by
proposing to adopt the mitigation strategies listed therein.
SECTION 3. Consider the previously approved Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND)
which was adopted by Council on October 26, 2009 date for the 2016 Foothills Fire
Management Plan Update.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED: __________, 2017
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSENTIONS:
ATTEST:
__________________________
City Clerk
__________________________
Mayor
APPROVED:
__________________________
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________
City Attorney
Attachment F:
Attachment F: City Manager’s Report 254:09 (May 18, 2009), including the 2009 Foothills Fire
Management Plan draft and Mitigated Negative Declaration was previously provided in hard
copy to the Council. The Plan draft and Mitigated Negative Declaration is available online:
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=15866