HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 7047City of Palo Alto (ID # 7047)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 6/13/2016
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: East Palo Alto Comment Letter
Title: Approval and Authorization for the City Manager to Sign a Letter
Commenting on the City of East Palo Alto's General Plan Update and Draft
Environmental Impact Report
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council approve and authorize the City Manager to sign the
attached letter commenting on the City of East Palo Alto’s proposed General Plan Update and
associated Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
Executive Summary
The City of East Palo Alto is inviting comments on their General Plan Update and an associated
Draft EIR which can be found at: http://vista2035epa.org/. A notice of availability was
published in early May and is included as Attachment A. Comments are due by 4:00 p.m. June
15, 2016.
The comment letter included as Attachment B reflects the input of multiple City departments
and addresses a wide range of issues, the most significant of which are:
Potential impacts associated with East Palo Alto’s proposal to allow additional
multifamily housing in its Westside planning area adjacent to Crescent Park.
East Palo Alto’s need for additional water supplies to enable future growth.
Please refer to the proposed comment letter in Attachment B for more details. Given the
potentials impacts on Palo Alto identified by the EIR, it is important that Mayor and Council
endorse the comment letter to be sent by the City Manager.
Attachments:
Attachment A: NOA-East Palo Alto General-Plan-2016 (PDF)
Attachment B: EPA Draft Comment letter 5.28.16 (DOC)
CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO
COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
1960 Tate St. yy East Palo Alto, CA 94303
(650) 853-3189 (phone)
DATE: April 29, 2016
TO: Interested Parties
SUBJECT: Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the 2035 East
Palo Alto General Plan
Notice is Hereby Given that the City of East Palo Alto, as the Lead Agency, is circulating for
public review a Draft Program Environmental Report (EIR) in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the 2035 East Palo Alto General Plan.
Project Location: The project area is the entire jurisdictional limits of the City.
Project Description: The City is preparing a comprehensive update and revision to its 1999
General Plan, which will serve as a blueprint to guide the City’s vision (also known as “Vista
2035”) for its long-term land use and development through the year 2035. See
http://vista2035epa.org for more information. There have been significant changes in the City
since the adoption of the 1999 General Plan, including substantial shifts in job and housing
markets, demographics, and transportation and infrastructure needs. Public comments for the
General Plan will be accepted until the end of the General Plan EIR public comment period.
Draft EIR: The Draft EIR prepared identifies the potentially significant environmental effects in
the following categories: Aesthetics, Agriculture, Air Quality, Noise and Vibration, Population
and Housing, Transportation and Traffic, Utilities and Service Systems,
Availability: The Draft EIR and General Plan can be viewed at the following locations:
East Palo Alto Branch Library, 2415 University Ave., East Palo Alto, CA 94303
East Palo Alto City Hall, City Clerk, 2415 University Ave., East Palo Alto, CA 94303
East Palo Alto Permit Center, 1960 Tate Street, East Palo Alto, CA 94303
Online at: http://vista2035epa.org/
Hazardous Materials: The project area includes the whole of the City of East Palo Alto, which
encompasses several sites that contain hazardous waste enumerated under Section 65962.5 of
the Government Code.
Public Hearing: There are two public meetings during the public comment period:
1. Public Hearing- East Palo Alto Planning Commission Meeting, May 23, 2016, 7:00 p.m;
2415 University Avenue, East Palo Alto, CA 94303
2. Public Hearing, East Palo Alto City Council, June 14, 2016, 7:30 p.m, 2415 University
Ave., East Palo Alto, CA 94303
Public Review Period & Comments: April 29, 2016-June 15, 2016 at 4PM. Written comments
should be addressed to: Guido F. Persicone, Senior Planner, City of East Palo Alto, 1960 Tate
Street, East Palo Alto, CA 94303 Alternatively, written comments can also be emailed to
gpersicone@cityofepa.org. Emailed comments must include “General Plan” in the subject box.
Attachment A
1
D-R-A-F-T
On Letter Head
June 13, 2016
Mr. Sean Charpentier
Assistant City Manger
City of East Palo Alto
1960 Tate Street
East Palo Alto CA 94303
RE: City of Palo Alto Comment Letter for Draft Environmental Impact Report on the
East Palo Alto General Plan Update 2035
Dear Mr. Charpentier,
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Draft Environmental
Impact Report (DEIR) on the East Palo Alto General Plan Update 2035. The City of Palo
Alto is aware of the planning efforts you have made in the past several years particularly
planning for the Westside Area adjacent to Palo Alto. The City recognizes that the
Westside Area Plan is incorporated into the General Plan Update 2035. Further we note
that in many cases other areas of shared interest with the City of East Palo Alto have
also been included in the General Plan Update 2035 including the Newell Bridge at our
boundary with the Woodland Neighborhood in the Westside Area. Based on these
mutual interests and other shared issues the City of Palo Alto has the following
comments on the Draft EIR for the General Plan Update 2035 (Project).
1. Aesthetics and Light and Glare. Comment #1 a and b
a. Visual Character. The DEIR describes the current situation in East Palo
Alto as “the vast majority of development in East Palo Alto is relatively
low in height (one to three stories) with the exception of a small number
of office and hotel buildings on the Westside that reach five to six
stories.” The Project proposes a significant change to the existing
development on the Westside in particular with shifting commercial land
uses to high density residential, substantial increase in density of existing
residential land uses and substantial increase in height limits in the
Westside (southern portion of Willow and all of Woodland
neighborhoods). Height limits would change from typically 35 feet to a
maximum 75+ feet on West Bayshore Road and to a maximum 75+ feet
from Woodland Road to US101 between Euclid and University Avenues.
Attachment B
2
The impact of this visual change in density in the Westside Area has not
been adequately addressed and could be significant.
b. Light and Glare. The project proposes a shift in land use from
commercial to high and urban density residential uses in the southern
part of the Willow neighborhood (Euclid to University Avenues) and
throughout the Woodland neighborhood. The new densities are achieved
by increasing the height limits for multiple family residential uses
significantly from generally three stories (35 feet) to 60 ft to 75 feet plus
(See DERI pg 3-23). The mitigation to change the impact from glare to
less than significant in the DEIR states that the impacts would not be
significant because “given the already urbanized character of the City and
the numerous existing sources of lighting, the incremental increase in
light and glare levels posed by new development, particularly if realized
gradually over the 20-year horizon of the General Plan Update, would not
be substantial”. This analysis and conclusion is inadequate and does not
address the significant change in structure height, potential for reflection
and glare from the density of structures in the Westside Area on adjacent
neighborhoods and on safety issues that may be created on adjacent
major arterials (US101 and University Avenue).
2. Hydrology and Water Quality: Comment #2 a, b, and c.
a. Storm water Runoff. The DEIR indicates that the Project will have a less
than significant impact on Storm water runoff with adherence to Federal
State Regional and proposed General Plan Policies. However, Page 4.9-
22: DEIR states that “Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPPs)
are not currently required for development projects involving less than
one acre of land, unless part of a common plan of development.” The
Municipal Regional Storm Water Discharge Permit that is applicable to all
Bay Area requires communities to “have the ability to require effective
storm water pollutant controls to prevent discharge of pollutants into the
storm drains, and implement progressively stricter enforcement to
achieve expedient compliance and cleanup at all public and private
construction sites”. With this one-acre exemption and without providing
authority to control runoff from all sites, the storm water runoff impact
has not been adequately addressed and would be significant.
b. Storm water Control Implementation. The DEIR (page 1.14) finds that
there are no anticipated significant unavoidable impacts to Hydrology
and Water Quality. However, many of the policies listed under
Infrastructure, Services, and Facilities Goal ISF-1 (Manage storm water
safely, efficiently, and sustainably) use the weak action verb “encourage”,
as opposed to “require”. These storm water control policies will likely not
3
be effective unless they are strengthened to give the City increased
authority to enforce them and the impact will not be reduced to less than
significant.
c. Development in the flood hazard area. Page 4.9-29: DEIR states that the
impact of developing in the flood hazard area is less than significant
because the “City of East Palo Alto, including but not limited to the
California Building Code, prohibits construction of occupied buildings
within a flood hazard area unless the structures are elevated above the
relevant flood elevation and properties are then removed from the
hazard area via the FEMA letter of map revision (LOMR) process”.
Elevation of the floor of a new or substantially improved structure within
a flood hazard area to a level at or above the established Base Flood
Elevation is typically required by a municipal flood hazard ordinance.
Elevation of a floor, however, does not qualify a structure for removal
from the flood hazard area via the LOMR process. A structure only
qualifies for a LOMR if the ground that the structure is built upon is at or
above the Base Flood Elevation. Without this consideration the impact of
development in the flood hazard zone is not less than significant.
3. Noise and Vibration - Comment #3
Noise impacts from future development are identified as less than significant on
two roadway segments in the Westside Area. However, the existing ambient
noise levels in these locations (Woodland Ave University Ave to Cooley Ave and
Euclid Ave to University Ave.) are already high, which affects the degree of
increase over the ambient noise level that is acceptable. The roadway segment
on Woodland Avenue from Newell to University was not evaluated. This
segment will carry substantially more traffic with the Project and the ambient
noise level in the area of this segment is 5-10dB lower than on the roadway
segment next to US101 studied. Without the evaluation of the Woodland Road
segment it is unclear that the noise impact would be less-than-significant in the
Woodland Neighborhood and on adjacent residential areas.
4. Population and Housing - Comment #4
The analysis indicates the projected addition of about 2,500 new housing units
or an estimated 7,764 residents by 2040, 105% of ABAG’s projected population
growth over the period. (Page 4.12-12) and notes that while 8% of the city’s land
area is in the Westside Area, 22% of the population lives in the Westside Area
(6,075 residents/56 residents per acre). (Chapter 11). The DEIR adds that
currently 5% of the multiple family uses in the city are multiple family units with
5 or more units. (Page 4.10-9) These uses are concentrated in the Westside Area
with 71% of the acreage developed in 5 or more units. (Page 4.10-7,11)
4
The Project would continue and intensify the trend of concentrating density and
focusing multiple family units in the Westside Area. This increase is achieved by
redesignating commercial and lower density residential areas to high density (43
DU/a) and Urban density (89 DU/a) residential designations and raising the
allowed height limits in the same areas from the current typical 35 feet to 60
feet and 75+ feet.
The analysis of Population and Housing does not address the disproportionate
distribution of the added population and development density within the City
into the Westside Area. Rather the DEIR evaluates the increased population and
density distribution as if it was evenly spread and concludes that the impacts to
population and housing would be less than significant because “the General Plan
creates a policy framework intended to support such population growth that
would be consistent with public service levels, infrastructure availability and
community goals.” To the degree that the increase in density of new population
and housing is concentrated in the Westside Area, the impact of the increased
density proposed by the Project appears to be more than significant and should
be given further study.
The City of Palo Alto has significant concerns about the development potential in
the Westside Area. Redevelopment of the area as proposed will not only
increase the number of dwelling units significantly, displacing the existing
residents, but it will exacerbate the parking and traffic impacts that spill over
from the Woodland Neighborhood in the Westside Area into the Crescent Park
neighborhood of Palo Alto. The East Palo Alto decision on redevelopment
allowed will have an impact on Palo Alto’s position and our City’s choice of the
preferred alternative for the Newell Bridge.
Transportation and Traffic: Comment # 5 a, b, c, d, and e
a. Traffic. The existing level of service (LOS) condition for intersection
Number 6, Woodland Avenue and University Avenue is shown in the DEIR
as LOS D in both the AM and PM peak hour. Based on on-going field
observations of this intersection during these periods, the City of Palo
Alto believes there’s a significant difference between the existing
condition identified in the DEIR and actual conditions, primarily in the PM
peak hour. Vehicle queues on University Avenue in the eastbound
direction approaching the intersection extend well into Palo Alto and
occasionally to Downtown Palo Alto, with demand consistently exceeding
capacity of the intersection. Capacity of this intersection is \further
constrained by signal operations that do not optimize throughput for
highest demand approaches. While these factors are not unique to this
intersection, they should be included, along with any unique
characteristics affecting capacity, in the evaluation of the existing
5
condition, cumulative no project and cumulative with project scenarios.
The City of Palo Alto finds that the estimated level of service is not
representative of the actual conditions, and that the proposed project
may result in a significant impact at this intersection if the baseline
conditions were more accurately represented.
b. Traffic. A significant share of trips arriving and departing East Palo Alto
use the intersection of Embarcadero Road and East Bayshore Road. This
intersection is not evaluated in the DEIR, despite significant queuing and
demands that exceed capacity. The cumulative growth projections may
result in a significant impact to this intersection and should be evaluated.
c. Traffic. The intersection of University Avenue and US 101 Southbound
Ramps constrain capacity nearby the University Avenue and Woodland
Avenue intersection resulting in substantial delays to vehicles leaving
Palo Alto during the PM peak period. This intersection should be
evaluated as a part of the DEIR.
d. Transportation and Traffic. Given the large increase in residential density
proposed in the Project for the Woodland neighborhood and the fact that
there are limited ingress/egress points to/from the neighborhood (West
Bayshore/Embarcadero, Woodland/University, Newell/Woodland), the
City must evaluate the traffic impacts to the Newell Road/Woodland
Avenue intersection and the increased traffic on Newell Road in Palo Alto
attributable to the increased density, particularly as they would affect the
access at the Newell Bridge.
e. Transit. Draft General Plan Chapter 6 page 14 shows two conceptual
street sections for University Avenue, one of which shows a reduction in
the number of vehicle lanes. Based on the results of the transit impacts
analysis in the DEIR, and proposed concentration of dense and mixed
uses along University, please consider adding a third conceptual street
section with transit-only lanes, and add language in T-2 2.2 to include
transit only lanes as an option.
5. Utilities and Service Systems: Comment #6
Future Water supply is identified as a Significant and Unavoidable effect without
mitigation because water demand created by the Project is not met by the City’s
existing and future water supplies. Analysis suggests that the new water
demands for the Project will be 1,699 acre feet by the year 2040 or a 73%
increase over the 2015 water usage. There is no identified program for meeting
this water demand. One action suggested is to build storage and infrastructure
to transport water to East Palo Alto and to secure additional water supply from
neighboring cities via permanent water exchanges. It should be noted that Palo
6
Alto has no current plans for a water supply exchange program. I would note
that we have recently had informal conversations at the City Manager level and
perhaps between individual Council Members of our jurisdictions regarding the
challenge facing East Palo Alto in this regard.
Thank you again for giving the City of Palo Alto an opportunity to review the
Public Draft General Plan 2035 and comment on the Draft Environmental Impact
Report on the City of East Palo Alto General Plan Update dated April 2016. We
appreciate that the General Plan Update brings together your planning for future
development and the Westside Area study; and that the environmental
document addresses both. We look forward to working with you in the future
to address our significant concerns about the future of the Westside Area.
Please continue to notify the City of Palo Alto as your planning program
progresses.
Sincerely,
James Keene
City Manager
CC Palo Alto Mayor & City Council
Hillary Gitelman, Director Planning and Community Environment
Carlos Martinez, East Palo Alto City Manager