Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 13595 City of Palo Alto (ID # 13595) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 9/27/2021 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Title: Adopt a Resolution Declaring an Emergency Shelter Crisis, Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Apply for California Project Homekey Funds in Conjunction with LifeMoves, and Related Direction to Staff Regarding an 88 -132-unit Emergency Shelter Project at a Portion of the LATP site (1237 North San Antonio Road); Environmental Assessment: Exempt Pursuant to AB 140 and AB 2553; Alternatively, Exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15269 as an Action to Mitigate an Emergency From: City Manager Lead Department: City Manager Recommendation Staff recommends that City Council: 1. Adopt a resolution declaring an emergency shelter crisis; 2. Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to apply for California Project Homekey funds in conjunction with LifeMoves for an 88-132-unit emergency shelter project at a portion of the LATP site (1237 North San Antonio Road); 3. Direct staff to complete due diligence necessary for the application; 4. Direct staff to return with necessary actions related to capital and operating costs for the project. Executive Summary The State of California released the Notice of Funding Availability for Project Homekey Round 2 in early September 2021. The City of Palo Alto is preparing to make an application to the program (resolution authorizing application will come in late packet). Moving forward with the proposed emergency shelter with Project Homekey funds would entail: 1. Adopting a resolution declaring a local emergency shelter crisis, which will help streamline the process for this and future emergency shelter projects. 2. Completing the due diligence necessary for the application (costs for geotechnical/survey/etc.). 3. Partnering with LifeMoves for the creation of 88-132 units of interim housing, which will be reviewed ministerially, with the possibility for a voluntary design review process 4. Leasing a portion of the LATP site to LifeMoves to facilitate the project. 10 Packet Pg. 268 City of Palo Alto Page 2 5. Revising the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) 5-year plan to allow for capital funds allocation to be used on this program. 6. Agreeing to the estimated ongoing operating costs associated with running the program. The first four (4) years of operating costs are anticipated to be covered by Santa Clara County and Project Homekey (Housing and Community Development Department). LifeMoves and the City will collectively identify and determine sources to cover the operating costs in years five (5) and six (6). There is an option for an additional operating year to be provided by Homekey under the NOFA if projects can demo nstrate a commitment of four or more years of non-Homekey operating funds for assisted units. Background City Council discussed services for unhoused Palo Altans at a study session on April 5, 2021 and expressed interest in many topics. The City Council heard an action item on this topic on August 9, 2021 and continued the item on August 30, 2021. The action for each meeting is below. - April 5, 2021 Study Session Report (no action taken) – CMR #12133 - August 9, 2021 (CMR# 13453); Actions taken: A. Support advancing an application for the Project Homekey Program for an emergency shelter in a portion of the Former Los Altos Treatment Plant (LATP) site with specific steps as follows: i. Pursue partnership with LifeMoves as the nonprofit partner; ii. Pursue zoning changes necessary to allow for an emergency shelter at the LATP site; iii. Direct Staff to identify funding sources and to include that information in the return report to the City Council; iv. Return to City Council in September with sufficient time to make an application and include all application details, including the explanation of all costs; and B. Continue City Council discussion on the rest of this item to a date uncertain. - August 30, 2021 (CMR #13521); Actions taken A. Adopt a Resolution endorsing the Santa Clara County “Community Plan to End Homelessness 2020-25”; and B. Direct Staff to return to City Council with a detailed proposal for an outreach team to the unhoused, which will include case management resources, additional Police resources, and program coordination staff. On September 9, 2021, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) announced the release of the HomeKey Program Round 2 Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for approximately $1.45 billion. Building on the success of both Project Roomkey and the first round of Homekey, this investment continues a statewide effort to sust ain and rapidly 10 Packet Pg. 269 City of Palo Alto Page 3 expand housing for persons experiencing homelessness or At Risk of Homelessness, and who are, thereby, inherently impacted by or at increased risk for medical diseases or conditions due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Cities, counties, or other local public entities, including housing authorities or federally recognized tribal governments within California, may apply independently or jointly as the lead applicant with a non -profit or a for-profit corporation. Discussion Since the City Council action on August 9, an interdepartmental team from the City Manager’s Office, Public Works, Community Services Department, Planning and Development Services, and the City Attorney’s Office have worked diligently with LifeMoves to do site study of the LATP site C and prepare materials needed in support of the Homekey application. Upon receipt of the full NOFA on September 9, 2021, staff and LifeMoves are working to prepare as much information as possible to share with the City Council by packet printing date of September 16. Some additional materials, such as the site concept plan, will be shared in late packet on September 23, 2021. The proposed project is the rapid deployment of modular housing for the purpose of providing interim housing opportunities for homeless individuals and families in the City of Palo Alto. The project location is 1237 North San Antonio Road, in Area C of the Former Los Altos Treatment Plant (LATP), a 1.16 acre site bordered by other industrial uses. The LATP site, was previously a treatment facility for the City of Los Altos. The site includes three different parts: Area A, Area B, and Area C. The northern third of the site, known as Area A, is approximately 4 acres of conservation land. This section is isolated from the rest of the FLATP by a berm and fence. The middle third of the site, known as Area B, is approximately 6.64 acres and the location of the former treatment plant. The treatment plant included an operations building, water tank, and series of treatment ponds. Several of the former treatment ponds have since been identified as jurisdictional wetlands. The operations building has been deconstructed, among other changes. Area B is the area Valley Water is working with the City on for a water purification site. The southern third of the site, known as Area C, is approximately 2.62 acres. This area is currently used as a contractor rental storage (was a staging yard related to the bike bridge project) and as Green Waste storage yard and transfer site, the City’s refuse collector. The specific portion of the site identified for Homekey is within the LATP Area C, approximately 1.16-acres adjacent to the Green Waste site. Further information about the LATP site, zoning and comprehensive plan designations, and what is needed for this Homekey program is explained further in the report. Alternative Sites Considered At the April 5, 2021 Study Session on Unhoused Services, the City Council expressed interest in the Project Homekey Program, should funding become available through the State budget. The City Council mentioned an interest in any hotels or motels that might be interested in selling their property to the City for this program. Staff reached out to hotels and motels and received 10 Packet Pg. 270 City of Palo Alto Page 4 very limited interest. The hotels that responded with interest noted high dollar per door costs associated with the sale of the properties. The few properties that did respond are located along the El Camino Real corridor. Staff also considered other City -owned land and other sites were in process for other plans at the City or were dedicated park land. LifeMoves also explored other private land but none of the options panned out due to a variety of reasons. Modular Units The Homekey site will consist of modular units. The modular units are pre -fabricated structures designed specifically for residential use. The site work would be primarily composed of demolition, utility connections, grading and hardscape, security fence, preparing site for sea- level rise, and landscape. Thirty percent of this site will be to accommodate support services such as offices for case management, employment and housing specialists, dining, community workshop, family lounge and onsite laundry. Population to Serve The focus of the site is for individuals and families based o n Palo Alto’s 2019 Point in Time count as well as other information shared with the City from the County about those impacted by the pandemic. As shown in the April 5 Study Session report (page 7) and in the further detailed Point in Time data, as shown in the August 9 report (page 3), Palo Alto has a mixture of unhoused individual adults and families, including veterans. The site would be operated for at least fifteen years as interim housing per the program’s durational requirement and would include both on-site and off-site/mobile personnel to operate the project staffed by LifeMoves, including a Program Director, case management, and the provision of other services. The site would be staffed 24/7 every day of the year. Number of Units Proposed The proposed number of units/beds proposed is 88 units in a two-story configuration. The City can also build a three-story configuration which could increase the number of units up to 132. Staff proposes the two-story configuration for the application. The proposed number of units tries to maximize as much density as possible while being sympathetic to the adjacent neighborhood, parking, and other building heights east of 101. In an 88-unit Homekey, the preliminary unit composition is for 24 family units and 64 single units. In an 132-unit Homekey, the preliminary unit composition is for 24 family units and 96 single units. The concept plan will be released in late packet. Costs to Apply There is no grant application fee. However, in order to prepare the materials for application, it is staff time as well as some due diligence costs (such as geotechnical, architectural, survey, etc.). Staff and LifeMoves anticipate these costs to be approximately $120,000 up front. The costs should be reimbursable by the Homekey grant but still need to be covered in the meantime between LifeMoves and the City. 10 Packet Pg. 271 City of Palo Alto Page 5 Capital Costs Homekey will fund a maximum grant amount per door which includes both the acquisition cost and any needed Rehabilitation or new construction. The Department will contribute a baseline amount per door, as outlined here. This baseline contribution does not require a local match. Unit Size -- Baseline Capital Amounts: 1) Studio or one-bedroom units will receive a baseline amount of $150,000 per door. 2) Two-bedroom units will receive a baseline amount of $175,000 per door. 3) Three-bedroom or larger units will receive a baseline amount of $200,000 per door. For the Palo Alto Homekey program, the preliminary estimated capital cost based on the proposed number of units is $17.6 million. Further details on capital investment expenses and the projected funding sources are outlined below in the Resource Impact section of this report. Operating Costs Based on consultation with LifeMoves, given the proposed number of units (a range of 88-132 units) the total operating costs are estimated to be $2.6-4 million per year. The Homekey grant includes two (2) years of operating costs in the grant award with a potential third year if certain points are met in the rating criteria. Additionally, Santa Clara County has pledged to cover an additional two (2) years of operating costs on top of the funding from the Homekey grant. The Board of Supervisors will further discuss Homekey at their October 5 Board meeting. There is an option for an additional operating year to be provided by Homekey under the NOFA if projects can demonstrate a commitment of four or more years of non-Homekey operating funds for assisted units. The City of Palo Alto, as part of the grant application, would need to commit to at least one year of operating funding and LifeMoves would also commit to at least one year of funding. For the City, this commitment would be for either year 5 or 6 of the program operation from the program launch date. City’s funding source would be identified at a later date. It is expected that the City would continue ownership of the land and would pursue a lease agreement with LifeMoves as part of this partnership. Staff is still exploring options for this and discussing draft partnership terms for the operation and maintenance of the facility. Planning, Land-Use, CEQA, and Site-Specifics for LATP Land-Use Streamlining – Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance Consistency LifeMoves, in coordination with the City of Palo Alto, is currently exploring two potential site designs. Under one option, the project site would have a split land use designation of Major Institution Special Facilities (MISP) and Conservation Land. An alternative option would loca te the project entirely on land designated as MISP. The site is zoned Public Facilities (PF) with a Site and Design (D) combining district. The MISP land use designation allows for government 10 Packet Pg. 272 City of Palo Alto Page 6 uses and lands that are either publicly owned or operated as non-profit organizations. Therefore, the proposed use is consistent with that land use designation. However, the proposed use is not consistent with the Conservation Land designation, which only allows for “resource management, recreation and educational activities compatible with resource conservation.” Therefore, development of a project within this land use designation would typically require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map (Map L -6). Similarly, the project’s proposed use is consistent with the allowed uses for public facility land, which include uses on land owned or leased by a public agency to another party. However, the project may not comply with all of the applicable development standards within the PF Zone. Typically, Site and Design review is required for a new use or a new building within the PF(D) Zone District and the project would be evaluated for consistency with the zoning code as part of that process. These discretionary acts (legislative amendment and design review) would also require analysis in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). However, for projects funded under AB 140 (Homekey), the project is automatically deemed consistent with all local requirements and no discretionary approvals can be required. This is outlined in Health and Safety Code section 50675.1.3, subsection (i), which states “Any project that uses funds received for any of the purposes specified in subdivision (a) shall be deemed consistent and in conformity with any applicable local plan, standard, or requirement, and any applicable coastal plan, local or otherwise, and allowed as a permitted use, within the zone in which the structure is located, and shall not be subject to a conditional use permit, discretionary permit, or any other discretionary reviews or approvals.” Therefore, neither a Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Amendment or Site and Design review are required; under state law the project must be ministerially approved. In addition, because there are no discretionary approvals, CEQA does not apply to approval of the proposed development. That said, leasing the land to LifeMoves would be a discretionary action that may be subject to CEQA. If Council adopts the attached resolution declaring an emergency shelter crisis (Attachment A), a specific statutory exemption would apply to the lease . Government Code section 8698.4, subsection (a)(4) states “The California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code) shall not apply to actions taken by a state agency or a city, county, or city and county, to lease, convey, or encumber land owned by a city, county, or city and county, or to facilitate the lease, conveyance, or encumbrance of land owned by the local government for, or to provide financial assistance to, a homeless shelter constructed or allowed by this section.” The declaration of an emergency shelter crisis also permits cities to suspend local procedures for emergency shelter projects; while this is not necessary for projects funded by Homekey, as discussed above, it could streamline future shelter projects that may not be funded by Homekey. Site Concept Plan The site concept plan mockup will be included in the late packet distributed on September 23, 2021. The plan will take into account necessary Fire Apparatus access needs as well as utility line easement areas. 10 Packet Pg. 273 City of Palo Alto Page 7 Site Specifics The LATP Area C site is located in the Baylands Master Plan area as well as the Sea -Level Rise Policy area. As such, the modulars would need to fit the intent of those policies. For the Sea- level rise policy, the site needs to be raised at least 3.5 feet above the current grade. The site access currently is from an access road off North San Antonio. The proposed design would include direct access to North San Antonio which would require raising the site grade. There are currently some utilities on site and staff is verifying which utility operators own each (water, electricity, fiber, sewer, refuse collection). The site will be all electric and not use gas. There was previous hazmat on this site. Staff is verifying necessary next steps for that. Site neighbors: the adjacent parcel usage is Green Waste as well as Valley Water (in the future). Green Waste operationally, arrives on site as early as 4am, Monday-Friday. This allows them to prepare for commercial bin pull outs and container exchanges, roll-off trucks picking-up debris boxes, and containers being wiped down or set up (add lids and wheels) to drop off to customers. This could be a sound impact to the Homekey program. Thus, the modular design will consider sound mitigation needs. Timeline, Resource Impact, Policy Implications Staff and LifeMoves anticipate application costs to be approximately $120,000 up front. The costs should be reimbursable by the Homekey grant but will need to be covered in the meantime between LifeMoves and City financial support. As described above, the capital costs of the Homekey program for 88 units is preliminarily estimated to be $17.6 million with $14.4 million that could be covered by the grant. Early provisional commitments from the philanthropic community could cover the remaining $3.2 million gap funding. For 132 units, the preliminary estimated capital costs are estimated to be $26.4 million with $19.2 million that could be covered by the grant, leaving a much higher gap funding of $7.2 million to close. The City and LifeMoves would partner to minimize the gap funding in either scenario, with the intent of mitigating unforeseen financial imp acts specifically to the City of Palo Alto to the extent possible. The preliminary estimated operating costs for Homekey would be $2.6 - $4 million annually (preliminarily estimated around $2.6 million for the 88-unit site). For 132 units, it is estimated preliminarily to be $4 million annually; these costs may escalate up to $4.8 million. The first 2 years would be covered by the Homekey grant, the 3rd and 4th year are pledged to be covered by Santa Clara County. The City and LifeMoves would collectively identify and determine sources to cover at least one year of operating expenses starting in year 5 or 6 after program launch. The City would continue ownership of the land and would pursue a lease agreement with LifeMoves as part of this partnership. Staff is still exploring options for this and discussing draft partnership terms for the operation 10 Packet Pg. 274 City of Palo Alto Page 8 and maintenance of the facility; any of these costs are not currently factored into the financial impacts outlined in this report. The City will lose rental revenue generated from this portion of the LATP site through various leases for either City or private use . Staff will gather more information and share with the City Council in the late packet memo. Timeline The grant timeline is as follows: Homekey funds will be available to Eligible Applicants on a continuous, Over-the-Counter (OTC) basis, rather than on a competitive basis. The following table summarizes the anticipated Homekey Program timeline. If Project HomeKey is funded, there will be a very ambitious timeline to deliver the project per State requirements to expend the funds within 8 months. Stakeholder Engagement Further stakeholder engagement will occur if the City is awarded the grant. Thus far, the engagement has been with partner agencies such as LifeMoves, Santa Clara County Office of Supportive Housing, and the Housing Authority. Staff has engaged with GreenWaste and will be in further touch with Valley Water, both are neighbors of the project site. 10 Packet Pg. 275 City of Palo Alto Page 9 Environmental Review Numerous state laws, including but not limited to AB 140 (2021) and AB 2553 (2020) have exempted emergency shelter projects, and specifically projects funded by the Project Homekey program, from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. To the extent an y of the actions contemplated by the City Council in relation to this project are not covered by these statutory exemptions, they are exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15269 as actions to mitigate an emergency related to the unhoused population in Palo Alto, as further detailed in Attachment A. Attachments: • Attachment10.a: Attachment A: Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Declaring a Shelter Crisis 10 Packet Pg. 276 *NOT YET ADOPTED* 1 0160053_20210916_ay16 Resolution No. ___ Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Declaring a Shelter Crisis R E C I T A L S A. The County of Santa Clara (the “County”) conducts a biannual census of the homeless population in the County, which includes sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons living in the City of Palo Alto (the “City”). This count serves as a baseline for understanding the homeless population in the region, capturing individuals and families sleeping in emergency shelters, transitional housing, as well as people living on the streets, in vehicles, abandoned properties, or other places not meant for human habitation. B. The County’s last count of the homeless population in Palo Alto was conducted in 2019. It showed that the population of homeless persons in Palo Alto had increased by 13% from 2017, from 276 to 313. In the same time span, proportion of unsheltered homeless Palo Altans grew. In 2017, 8% of homeless Palo Altans were sheltered. In 2019, only 4% of homeless Palo Altans were sheltered. C. A number of community-based organizations in Palo Alto provide food, financial assistance, and other services to those in need. These organizations include Destination Home, Dignity on Wheels, the Heart and Home Collaborative, and the LifeMoves Opportunity Services Center. Despite these efforts, a significant number of persons within Palo Alto are without the ability to obtain shelter. D. People experiencing homelessness are at a higher risk of injury, illness, and harm due to weather exposure and are likely to have inadequate access to other basic human services, such as utilities, sanitary waste facilities, and garbage services, which can have adverse consequences for themselves and their communities. This is especially true for unsheltered homeless persons. E. National analysis from the Journal of the American Medical Association noted that people experiencing homelessness bear a disproportionate burden of chronic illnesses and have been unable to consistently practice social isolation, causing them to be disproportionately affected by COVID-19. Studies from the early months of the pandemic in the United States demonstrated infection rates were substantially higher among homeless populations than among those with stable housing. F. Section 8698.2 of the Government Code of the State of California authorizes the City of Palo Alto to declare the existence of a shelter crisis upon finding that a significant number of residents are without the ability to obtain shelter, resulting in a threat to their health and safety. 10.a Packet Pg. 277 *NOT YET ADOPTED* 2 0160053_20210916_ay16 G. Section 8698.1 of the Government Code of the State of California provides limited immunity for ordinary negligence in the provision of emergency housing by opening public facilities to homeless persons and suspends strict compliance with housing, health, or safety standards to the extent that strict compliance would hinder the mitigation of the effects of the shelter crisis. Moreover, the City may, in place of such standards, enact health and safety standards to operate during the housing emergency consistent with ensuring minimal public health and safety. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows: SECTION 1. The Council finds that a shelter crisis exists within the City of Palo Alto because a significant number of Palo Alto residents are without the ability to obtain stable housing or shelter, resulting in threats to their health and safety and for the reasons stated in the Recitals above. SECTION 2. The Council hereby declares a shelter crisis within the City of Palo Alto. SECTION 3. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution does not meet the definition of a project under Public Resources Code Section 21065, thus, no environmental assessment under the California Environmental Quality Act is required at present. Individual upgrades or changes at utility facilities, if needed as a result of the City’s implementation of the Plan, will be analyzed under CEQA. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: __________________________ _____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: __________________________ _____________________________ Assistant City Attorney City Manager 10.a Packet Pg. 278