Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 15018 (2) City of Palo Alto (ID # 15018) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Study Session Meeting Date: 12/5/2022 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Stanford Community Plan Title: Study Session to Receive an Update on the Santa Clara County’s Effort to Update the Stanford Community Plan. From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Development Services Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council conduct a study session to receive an update on the County’s effort to update the Stanford Community Plan. Background: Santa Clara County has been preparing an update to the Stanford Community Plan (SCP). The SCP is a component of the County’s General Plan and applies to Stanford University lands in unincorporated areas of Santa Clara County. The SCP sets forth goals, policies and programs to guide development within these areas; the 2000 General Use Permit is a regulatory land use document that implements the SCP. There is also a 1985 Land Use Policy Agreement signed by the County, Stanford University and the City of Palo Alto that sets forth certain policies regarding land use, annexation and development of Stanford lands in the County. More specifically, the agreement establishes that academic land uses in unincorporated areas, for which Stanford provides municipal services, and open space and agricultural land uses held in reserve for academic use, should remain unincorporated. Non-academic uses should be subject to city (Palo Alto) annexation. The Stanford Research Park, Stanford Hospital and Stanford Shopping Center are Palo Alto incorporated areas. The SCP was last amended in 2015. The County was preparing an amendment with the filing and subsequent withdrawal of Stanford University’s General Use Permit application. The County has since proceeded with the SCP amendment, which has been further informed by the City of Palo Alto Page 2 preparation of three additional studies, including: municipal services;1 childcare;2 and, graduate student housing affordability studies.3 Having conducted a number of community meetings and study sessions, which staff has previously provided updates to Council, the County Board of Supervisors is poised to signal its intent to adopt the SCP on December 13, 2022. City staff requested, and the County agreed, to have a County representative provide an update to the City Council on the SCP in advance of the Board of Supervisors action next week. This study session is in response to that request. No action can be taken by the City Council at the study session but Councilmember comments and feedback will be summarized by the County and provided to the Board of Supervisors for consideration at their December meeting. Additional information is available in the County’s prior staff reports.4 Policy Implications: The SCP will set forth the goals, policies and programs that will guide development on unicorporated academic, open space and agricultural lands in Santa Clara County. As a neighboring juridisction, the City of Palo Alto has a policy interest in how development may impact housing supply, traffic, parking, access to City parks and potentially other municipal services. On September 14, 2022, Mayor Burt sent a letter to County staff highlighting the City’s interest in housing, circulation, property acquisition in Palo Alto for academic uses and how that impacts the City’s property tax revenue, and other topics. The letter was previously transmitted to the City Council and is included with this report as Attachment A. Resource Impact: Staff has been monitorring this project and providing updates to the City Council as appropriate, including scheduling this study session discussion. This work has been absorbed using existing department resources. 1https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5ef397ab7a79e315cd9066ae/t/625de6a8d406c01667f8323c/1650321067 805/3815001_StanfordU_MunicipalSvcsStudy_04.15.2022_draft.pdf 2https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5ef397ab7a79e315cd9066ae/t/62867e89dd8254178e016dcb/165298138 7389/Stanford+Childcare+Needs+Assessment+-+FINAL+PUBLIC+REVIEW+DRAFT-+05.18.2022.pdf 3https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5ef397ab7a79e315cd9066ae/t/627ee19cf03ad051390ae248/1652482461 809/Draft+Housing+Report+5-12-22.pdf 4 October 18, 2022, Agenda Item 13: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5ef397ab7a79e315cd9066ae/t/627ee19cf03ad051390ae248/1652482461 809/Draft+Housing+Report+5-12-22.pdf City of Palo Alto Page 3 Timeline: The Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors have decision-making authority for the SCP and intend to signal its intent to adopt the plan in December with final approval anticiapted in 2023 pending conclusion of the associated environmental analysis. Stakeholder Engagement: The County has held several virtual community meetings last summer to receive public input. Staff has provided Council updates throughout the plan prepartion process. Attachments: Attachment A: Palo Alto Comment Letter (Stanford Community Plan) HLUET 09.15.22 (PDF) CITY OF PALO ALTO | 250 HAMILTON AVENUE, PALO ALTO, CA. 94301 | 650-329-2100 September 14, 2022 Jacqueline Onciano, Director Department of Planning and Development Santa Clara County Planning Office 70 W. Hedding Street 7th Floor, East Wing San Jose, CA 95110 RE: Stanford Community Plan Update Dear Ms. Onciano & Staff: The City of Palo Alto thanks the County for the valuable work that has been put into the Draft Stanford Community Plan and we appreciate the opportunity to comment on the update. The City supports this effort as an important next step in planning for the future of the unincorporated Stanford University lands, and we appreciate the County’s public engagement efforts and opportunities for input on the issue. This is particularly important to the City given Stanford’s adjacency and impacts on Palo Alto. In the context of the ‘1985 Land Use Policy Agreement’ between the County, Stanford, and Palo Alto, we offer the following comments and request additional opportunities for continued engagement to fully understand the implications of the SCP on Palo Alto. The issues of primary concern to the City, based on information available at this time, are briefly highlighted below: A. Housing 1. House students/employees on Stanford-owned properties. We suggest that the University continue to strive to house all its students and employees on Stanford-owned properties. Given the very great challenges of meeting Palo Alto’s current RHNA mandate for over 6,000 housing units in the coming eight-year period, we are concerned by the SCP proposal to allow up to 30% of Stanford’s housing requirements on Stanford owned lands that are contiguous to the University. These sites would be primarily in Palo Alto on land (primarily the Stanford Research Park) that the city is seeking to be used for housing for those who work in the City. In addition, Stanford should be required to evaluate other properties within its academic growth boundary for housing. 2. Build housing before academic buildings. We encourage policy that builds housing first then allows academic development. 3. County’s Housing Opportunity Sites on Stanford Lands. The County’s Draft Housing Element identifies three housing opportunity sites with potential for between 1,680 and 2,160 dwelling units that represents between 53-69% of the total Regional Housing Needs Allocation for the County. • This is substantial planned growth adjacent to the City limits, which is only second to the opportunity sites located adjacent to the City of San Jose. However, in contrast, the Stanford sites are concentrated in one area, creating the potential for a greater impact on Palo Alto. B. Circulation 1. Parking Impacts: Stanford should be required to pay for mitigation of parking impacts which could include the initiation and operation of necessary Residential Parking Programs (RPP). 2. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program Changes: Palo Alto is greatly impacted if the Stanford TDM program fails. For Stanford’s TDM to work, it needs to invest in Palo Alto infrastructure and transit. • The new Trip Reduction approach in lieu of fair-share intersection payments and the Trip Credit Methodology needs to be clarified and explained. • It is not appropriate that Stanford Research Park trips reduced are being used as trip credits for campus development. • A better approach would be to target trip reduction activities to non-Stanford employees without access to TDM programs. 3. In lieu of fair share intersection payments: Expansion, integration, and transparency of the Marguerite system into the City of Palo Alto neighborhoods, in collaboration with the City, should be considered or required. Financial support of local transit in lieu of Marguerite expansion is aa preferred consideration. Moreover, it would be appropriate to provide funds additional bicycle/pedestrian and vehicular crossings of the Caltrain corridor. C. 27 University Property and the Caltrain Station: Stanford owns these key parcels, which constitute the busiest Caltrain station. Stanford’s entities rely on Caltrain as the backbone of its TDM program. Future planning of this site should be an important consideration in the SCP. D. Stanford’s shift to Life Sciences: This shift introduces potentially hazardous materials, and its handling and storage of these materials affects the City’s interest in locating additional housing in and around the Stanford Research Park. E. Impacts of Stanford Acquiring Land in Palo Alto: The City has concerns regarding Stanford acquiring land in Palo Alto and how this affects the City’s property tax revenue when used for ‘academic’ purposes as defined in the 1985 Agreement, including housing for faculty. Palo Alto is concerned with the prospect of Stanford owned housing within the City being exempt from property taxes despite additional impacts of those residents on our public schools and city services. Palo Alto seeks full disclosure by Stanford of University owned properties within the city limits, their status, and a calculation of tax revenue lost. We would be happy to meet with you and Supervisor Simitian if such a meeting would help resolve any of these issues or concerns. If there are any questions regarding the specific SCP update comments attached, please contact our Planning Director Jonathan Lait at Jonathan.lait@cityofpaloalto.org. Sincerely, Mayor Pat Burt Cc Palo Alto City Council City Manager Ed Shikada City Attorney Molly Stump Jonathan Lait/File