Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-05-31 City Council Agenda PacketCity Council COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 1 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. May 31, 2016 Special Meeting Community Meeting Room 6:00 PM Agenda posted according to PAMC Section 2.04.070. Supporting materials are available in the Council Chambers on the Thursday 10 days preceding the meeting. Committee of the Whole Meetings are special meetings, scheduled periodically by Council to have discussions and take action or provide directives to Staff on various topics in a less formal setting. The sessions are designed to allow for a conversation between the Council Members, and between the Council Members and Staff. Roll Call Study Session 1.Council Study Session on Sea Level Rise Oral Communications Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. Council reserves the right to limit the duration of Oral Communications period to 30 minutes. Action Items Include: Reports of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Reports of Officials, Unfinished Business and Council Matters. 2.Second Quarter Review of Council Priorities for 2016 and Discussion and Potential Direction to Staff on the 2016 Staff Work Plan, IncludingProcess Recommendations to Prioritize Work and Achieve Results (An updated copy of the Council Priorities Work Plan will be sent out Friday, May 27, 2016. Additional materials by Staff may be provided at the meeting) 3.Council Member Discussion on Future Issues and Concerns With a Special Focus on the Second Half of 2016, With Potential Direction to Staff (Conversation) At Place Memo 2 May 31, 2016 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. 4. Reports From Council Appointed Officers (CAOs) on the State of the City (Conversation) Adjournment AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT (ADA) Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in using City facilities, services or programs or who would like information on the City’s compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact (650) 329-2550 (Voice) 24 hours in advance. 3 May 31, 2016 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Additional Information City of Palo Alto (ID # 6953) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Study Session Meeting Date: 5/31/2016 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Study Session on Sea Level Rise Title: Council Study Session on Sea Level Rise From: City Manager Lead Department: Public Works Recommendation This is a Study Session report and requires no Council action. Executive Summary This study session is being presented to identify facility-specific and programmatic issues that involve sea level rise. Six “Guiding Principles” and three generic “Tools” are being presented as a framework for Council discussion both now and as plans and projects are brought to Council in the future. Specific concerns discussed in this report as examples include the Regional Water Quality Control Plant, the Palo Alto Golf Course and Palo Alto Airport, the Municipal Service Center/Emergency Response capabilities, and the City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Update to show how the Guiding Principles and Tools could be used to assist in decision-making. Council input on the Guiding Principles and Tools is being sought in preparation for specific program and project recommendations, which will follow in the coming months. Background Scientists agree that climate change has led to global increases in temperature and sea level rise. In the past century, global mean sea level has increased by seven to eight inches1. In the last 10 to 15 years, the rate of global sea level rise has increased by about 50 percent. According to experts, climate change will fundamentally change the way we live. No longer will the environment be a static condition, a certainty upon which other variables depend. Rather, it will be a 1 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2013 City of Palo Alto Page 2 variable itself, and it will make us plan for the future like never before.2 In addition to the non-static nature of climate change and its effects, the sheer complexity of the multiple factors that affect climate change makes modeling difficult at best. There are many elements at risk of variation because of climate change, and it is not known how each of these elements will affect each other. As a result, the general public’s assumption of a steady and predictable change is likely not accurate. The San Francisco Bay, home to one of the oldest tide gauges in the country, has seen 0.63 feet of sea level rise over the last century. In the coming century, the rate of sea level rise is expected to accelerate, as higher average atmospheric temperatures cause glaciers and the polar ice caps to melt. Opinions vary on the forecasted amount of sea level rise, but there is little argument that the accelerating trend will continue. As a result, there is a very high level of uncertainty for which it is difficult to plan. In the year 2000, the State of California adopted guidance and sea level rise projections for planning purposes ranging from 10 to 17 inches by 2050, 17 to 32 inches by 2070, and 31 to 69 inches by 21003. The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) in its latest Bay Plan amendment (October 2011) revised its estimate of the year 2100 sea level rise from 55 inches to up to 69 inches. However, data on sea level rise is evolving, and BCDC uses the 55-inch sea level rise scenario in the Bay Plan when assessing long- term impacts. Recent projections by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) for the South Bay range from 0.5 to 5 meters (19.7 to 196.8 inches), showing the considerable uncertainty as to what level of rising waters to expect and the high variability in projections.4 The Pacific Institute estimates that a 3.28 foot rise in sea level would put 220,000 people at risk of a 1% (100‐year) flood event, given today’s population in the Bay Area. Critical infrastructure, such as roads, hospitals, schools, emergency facilities, wastewater treatment plants, power plants, and more will be at increased risk of inundation, as will vast areas of wetlands and other natural 2 Columbia Law School, Center for Climate Change Law, Managed Coastal Retreat, 2013 3 http://www.opc.ca.gov/webmaster/ftp/pdf/docs/2013_SLR_Guidance_Update_FINAL1.pdf 4 http://www.spur.org/publications/article/2009-11-01/sea-level-rise-and-future-bay-area City of Palo Alto Page 3 ecosystems. In addition, it is estimated that the cost of replacing property that will likely be at risk of coastal flooding with this level of sea level rise is $49 billion (in year 2000 dollars)5. The overall result of both sea level rise and possible changes in precipitation patterns is that low-lying areas surrounding the San Francisco Bay will experience more frequent and severe flooding. Areas that are typically flood-prone will be inundated, and some areas that are currently not at risk will be periodically flooded. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) predicts that by 2050, a majority of U.S. coastal areas are likely to be threatened by 30 or more days of flooding each year due to dramatically accelerating impacts from sea level rise.6 The purpose of this study session is to: 1) inform the Council on sea level rise protection, mitigation, and adaptation efforts occurring in California, regionally, and in Palo Alto; 2) prepare Council for future actions; 3) present conceptual draft guiding principles for addressing sea level rise; and 4) obtain input from Council members on their questions, priorities, and vision for Palo Alto regarding sea level rise. Discussion Palo Alto’s existing Bayfront flood protection system is comprised of a levee network between San Francisquito Creek and the Mountain View border. These levees do not meet current Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) standards for height or construction quality. As a result, there are approximately 2,700 Palo Alto properties in a FEMA-designated Special Flood Hazard Area that are currently potentially subject to tidal flooding from a 1% (100-year) high tide event in San Francisco Bay, assuming no sea level rise. In addition there are critical City facilities and infrastructure as well as a regional facility located within the designated tidal floodplain, including:  Regional Water Quality Control Plant  Palo Alto Airport  City of Palo Alto Municipal Service Center  Palo Alto Utility Control and Engineering Center 5 http://www.pacinst.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2013/02/sea_level_rise_sf_bay_cec3.pdf 6 Coastal Hazards Resiliency Group (CHARG), Strategic Brief, 2015 City of Palo Alto Page 4  City of Palo Alto Animal Services  City of Palo Alto offices at Elwell Court  Palo Alto Municipal Golf Course  Palo Alto Baylands and Byxbee Park  Palo Alto’s closed landfill  Commercial properties, including the U.S. Post Office and International School  Regional utility corridors (e.g. PG&E gas mains and electric transmission lines)  Palo Alto Utility Substations  Stormwater Pump Stations  U.S. Highway 101 Sea level rise will result in an increase in the number of properties designated as being in the floodplain unless measures are taken to adapt and protect the shoreline and/or specific properties. Such measures may lead to possible changes in the shoreline as decisions must be made regarding which assets to protect and whether to retreat or adapt. It will require the expenditure of significant resources to address sea level rise. Sea level rise also poses emergency response and safety challenges, which are addressed in the City’s Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment as well as the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. This study session provides the Council with information on efforts being taken at the state, regional and local level related to sea level rise. State of California Initiatives In 2014, the State legislature passed AB 2516, which imposes new requirements for sea level rise planning. The law directed the California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) to create a database consisting of various entities, departments, and boards to share information about sea level rise planning projects. Participating agencies include the Department of Water Resources, California Coastal Commission, State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission, State Lands Commission, San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, and State Coastal Conservancy. AB2516 requires, on or before January 1, 2016, the CNRA, in collaboration with the Ocean Protection Council (OPC), to create, update biannually, and post on an internet website a Planning for Sea Level Rise Database describing steps being taken throughout the state to prepare for and adapt to sea level rise. As a result of AB 2516, the Palo City of Palo Alto Page 5 Alto Utilities Department and Palo Alto Airport were required to provide information on July 1, 2015 regarding their planning efforts with respect to sea level rise. The State Assembly has a Select Committee on Sea Level Rise and the California Economy chaired by Assemblyman Rich Gordon. The California Coastal Commission unanimously adopted a Sea Level Rise Policy Guidance document on August 12, 2015. It provides an overview of the best available science on sea level rise for California and a recommended methodology for addressing sea level rise in Coastal Commission planning and regulatory actions. The potential impacts of sea level rise fall within the California Coastal Commission’s (and local governments’) planning and regulatory responsibilities under the Coastal Act. Sea level rise increases the risk of flooding, coastal erosion, and saltwater intrusion into freshwater supplies. The Coastal Act mandates the protection of public access and recreation along the coast, coastal habitats, and other sensitive resources, as well as providing priority visitor-serving and coastal- dependent or coastal-related development while simultaneously minimizing risks from coastal hazards. The California Ocean Protection Council provided an updated Sea Level Rise Guidance Document "to help state agencies incorporate future sea-level rise impacts into planning decisions." This document includes a table summarizing sea level rise models for the years 2030-2100 north and south of Cape Mendocino, which were adopted by the State for planning projections. The State of California Natural Resources Agency has a California Climate Adaptation Strategy, which is a comprehensive plan to guide adaptation to climate change, becoming the first state to develop such a strategy in 2009. Bay Area Initiatives The Coastal Hazards Adaptation Resiliency Group (CHARG) is a forum at which local, regional, state, and federal scientists, engineers, planners, and policy makers can develop a common understanding about regional coastal hazards issues. CHARG’s participants represent many Bay Area cities (including Palo Alto), all nine Bay Area counties, and regional, state, and federal agencies. Each member organization is responsible for protecting public safety, health, and City of Palo Alto Page 6 welfare through planning, building, and maintaining infrastructure and enhancing and maintaining the natural environment. CHARG has developed a Strategic Brief and is working on technical, funding, and policy issues related to sea level rise. The Santa Clara Valley Water District (Water District) and Joint Venture Silicon Valley are hosting sub-regional meetings for agencies in Santa Clara County. The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) consists of 27 members who represent various interests in the Bay, including federal, state, regional, and local governments and the public of the San Francisco Bay region. The Commission is authorized to control: 1) Bay filling and dredging, and 2) bay-related shoreline development. BCDC updated the San Francisco Bay Plan in October 2011 to deal with the expected impacts of climate change in San Francisco Bay.7 The previous policy language recommended that new development not be approved in low-lying areas that are in danger of flooding now or in the future unless the development was elevated above possible flood levels. The new BCDC policies require sea level rise risk assessments to be conducted when planning shoreline development or designing large shoreline projects within BCDC jurisdiction. The risk assessment should be prepared by a qualified engineer and should be based on the estimated 100-year flood elevation that takes into account a range of sea level projections for mid-century and end of century. All projects should be designed to be resilient to a mid-century sea level rise projection. If it is likely that the project will remain in place longer than mid- century, an adaptive management plan should be developed to address the long- term impacts. Shoreline protection projects, such as levees and seawalls, must be designed to withstand the effects of projected sea level rise and to be integrated with adjacent shoreline protection. Whenever feasible, projects must integrate hard shoreline protection structures with natural features, such as marsh or upland vegetation, that enhance the Bay ecosystem. [2] Adapting to Rising Tides (ART) is a collaborative planning effort led by BCDC and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Coastal Services Center to understand how San Francisco Bay Area communities can adapt to sea level rise and storm event flooding. The ART Project has engaged local, regional, state and federal agencies, as well as non-profit and private stakeholders, to explore how the Bay Area can increase resilience to sea level rise and storm events, while protecting critical ecosystem and community services. 7 http://www.bcdc.ca.gov/planning/climate_change/SLRfactSheet.shtml City of Palo Alto Page 7 The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) provides resources via its Resilience Program (http://resilience.abag.ca.gov/climate_change/) as well as sea level rise vulnerability maps (http://resilience.abag.ca.gov/news/new-sea-level- rise-map-interface/) The South Bay Salt Pond Restoration Project is the largest tidal wetland restoration project on the West Coast. When complete, the project will restore 15,100 acres of industrial salt ponds to a rich mosaic of tidal wetlands and other habitats. Its goals are to restore wetland habitat, provide public access and recreation, and provide for flood management in the South Bay that enables restoration. Once established, tidal marshes on the outboard side of levees will be the first line of flood defense and will help protect the levees from storm wave action and tidal surge. Restored tidal wetlands also increase the flood carrying capacity of local creeks, flood control channels, and rivers. In addition, the San Francisco Estuary Institute has updated its Baylands Goals Report to include sea level rise. The Baylands Goals Report provides a roadmap for wetland restoration and describes how such restoration can assist with sea level rise protection. In order for wetlands to assist with sea level rise adaptation, they must be restored quickly, reconnected to natural processes, such as creeks, and have open land to be able to migrate landward as sea levels rise.8 The San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority9 is a regional government agency charged with raising and allocating resources for the restoration, enhancement, protection, and enjoyment of wetlands and wildlife habitat in the San Francisco Bay and along its shoreline. The Authority was created by the California legislature in 2008 with the enactment of AB 2954 (Lieber). The restoration authority has placed a regional parcel tax measure on the June 2016 ballot. The $12 tax would raise $500 million over 20 years to fund flood protection infrastructure and wetland restoration projects across the San Francisco Bay. The South San Francisco Bay Shoreline Study is a study by the US Army Corps of Engineers funded through a congressional appropriation together with local funding from the Water District and the State Coastal Conservancy to identify and recommend tidal flood risk management projects for federal funding. The 8 www.baylandsgoals.org 9 http://sfbayrestore.org/ City of Palo Alto Page 8 shoreline study team is currently working on the planning and design of flood protection projects in the Alviso area of San Jose and a pre-feasibility study for the remaining shoreline area in Santa Clara County. The Water District is also working with the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority (JPA) on flood protection, has performed coastal floodplain modeling, and maintains a resource website on sea level rise10. The Bay Area Climate Change Consortium (BAECCC) facilitates collaboration between resource managers, scientists, and interested parties. BAECCC is working on implementing a Natural Infrastructure Initiative to recognize the value the ecosystems in the Bay Area add to human well-being and resiliency. The Silicon Valley 2.0 Project was developed by the County of Santa Clara Office of Sustainability to respond to a gap in regional climate adaptation planning and the need for an implementation tool rather than simply a plan.11 This interactive risk management tool includes geo-economic information about various assets and allows planners to assess the value of vulnerable assets. The Bay Area Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IRWMP) presents a thorough summary of climate change projections and expected impacts to four water-related Functional Areas in the Bay Area, including water supply/water quality, flood control wastewater/stormwater, and watershed and habitat protection. The Bay Area IRWMP reviewed climate change adaptation strategies from a wide range of regional and local initiatives and planning documents such as urban water management plans, habitat restoration plans, wastewater treatment master plans, watershed stewardship plans and water supply strategies. The Bay Area IRWMP identifies the following general strategies for adapting to climate change:  Incorporate climate change adaptation into relevant local and regional plans and projects;  “No Regrets” approach to address immediate or ongoing concerns while reducing future risks; 10http://cf.valleywater.org/Water/Where_Your_Water_Comes_From/Water%20Supply%20and%20Infrastructure %20Planning/Climate%20Change/SeaLevel.cfm 11 https://www.sccgov.org/sites/osp/SV2/Pages/SV2.aspx City of Palo Alto Page 9  Establish a climate change adaptation public outreach and education program;  Build collaborative relationships between regional entities and neighboring communities to promote complementary adaptation strategy development and regional approaches;  Establish an ongoing monitoring program to track local and regional climate impacts and adaptation strategy effectiveness; and  Update building codes and zoning. For Sea Level Rise, the specific strategies identified by the Bay Area IRWMP are:  Multifunctional ecosystem-based adaptation along the bay shore and rivers  Remove critical infrastructure from hazard zone  Raise, armor and maintain flood control structures that protect critical infrastructure that cannot be moved.  Prevent placement of new infrastructure in areas likely to be inundated.  Improve emergency preparedness, response, evacuation and recovery plans. Local Projects The City of Mountain View conducted a comprehensive sea level rise vulnerability and adaptation assessment for its Shoreline Community adjacent to San Francisco Bay. The study addresses the potential for increased flooding directly from coastal sources as well as upstream sea level rise impacts to creek flooding and stormwater drainage. Supporting assessments include geotechnical levee evaluations, pump intake siltation, and landfill management concerns. As a result of the study, the City has developed a Capital Improvement Program to meet the flood protection needs of the area. Across the Bay in San Leandro, a multi-agency partnership is piloting the construction of a wide horizontal “ecotone” levee at the Oro Loma Sanitary District wastewater treatment plant. The ecotone slope (essentially a wide, gently-sloped levee with wetland vegetation) serves to provide protection from rising sea levels as well as increase the removal of nutrients from secondary wastewater effluent. Wastewater treatment plants of the future will be moving away from the goal of “wastewater treatment” and towards a framework of “resource recovery.” Wastewater contains two major resources that are important to the ecology of coastal ecosystems: fresh water and nutrients. The City of Palo Alto Page 10 movement of fresh water across the ecotone slope is crucial in replenishing a coastal habitat type that has been removed from the Bay as streams have been channelized. In addition, wastewater contains nutrients that can stimulate the growth of the plants on the ecotone levee.12 In terms of tidal flood protection, the San Francisquito Creek JPA is conducting a levee improvement feasibility study and design project for the Bayfront levees between San Francisquito Creek and Redwood City. This project, which the JPA has designated as the “Strategy to Advance Flood protection, Ecosystems and Recreation” or “SAFER Bay” project, is being jointly funded through a grant from the State of California Department of Water Resources (DWR) and financial contributions from the cities of Menlo Park, East Palo Alto and Palo Alto. This is a separate, but related project from the JPA’s San Francisquito Creek Flood Protection Project. The scope of the SAFER Bay project includes a feasibility study to identify the preferred alternative for improving the existing Bayfront levee system to provide 1% (100-year) protection from tidal flooding (including consideration of future sea level rise), followed by preparation of an environmental impact report and final construction bid documents. While FEMA does not currently address sea level rise in its flood mapping, the SAFER Bay feasibility study incorporates three feet of sea level rise into its design assumptions in order to be consistent with the project time frame (at least five decades) and the range of sea level rise projections over this time13. The JPA has a long-term goal of placing a ballot measure before local voters seeking approval of a special tax or assessment to fund construction of the recommended tidal levee improvements. The feasibility study consultant team is currently finalizing a report with potential levee alignments for the Palo Alto area. Restoration of tidal marshes, including the idea of constructing wide ecotone levees, is one of the strategies being considered regionally as the first line of defense from rising seas and storm surges, which also allows for levees to be lower than they would need to be without the marsh protection (see discussion above of Baylands Goals Report). 12 http://www.acfloodcontrol.org/SFBayCHARG/pdf/oro_loma_ecotone.pdf 13 Based on OPC 2013 and USACE 2011 City of Palo Alto Page 11 Palo Alto Responding to sea level rise generally involves three generic tools:  Protect (e.g. levees, floodwalls, wetlands)  Adapt (e.g. build any new or substantially-improved structures elevated above future flood levels or as structures that can be submerged without sustaining appreciable damage)  Retreat (e.g. either partially/seasonably or completely surrender an area to rising sea level) While our primary and most cost-effective option may be to protect as much of the existing floodplain as possible from tidal flooding, if sea level rise meets or exceeds the currently accepted projections, managed retreat may be needed over the long-term due to the limitations of the protective structures as well as the costs of continuing to armor the coastline. The City of Palo Alto already has limited protection and adaptation measures in place, and related zoning policies in areas of flood risk. Staff has developed the following six guiding principles regarding sea level rise for discussion purposes: 1. For City of Palo Alto capital projects, use sea level rise assumptions that accommodate the range of California and regional sea level rise estimates and are consistent with other planning efforts. At this time, the sea level rise estimate should be a minimum of 55 inches by year 2100 based on BCDC projections. 2. Staff should continue to monitor the latest climate change and sea level rise science and adapt as needed if sea level rise occurs at a more rapid pace and/or higher levels than currently projected. 3. Any engineered solutions should be adaptable to changing predictions. 4. All three categories of tools (protect, adapt, retreat) should be considered when appropriate and cost effective. 5. For areas where a protection strategy, i.e. levees, is being pursued, additional tools should still be used in case the severity and speed of sea level rise increases and other measures, such as designing structures that can get wet and locating sensitive equipment higher in a building, become necessary. City of Palo Alto Page 12 6. Staff should continue to collaborate with regional planning efforts on studies of impacts and strategies for response to sea level rise. The following three examples serve to illustrate how the guiding principles and tools may be used: 1. The Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP) serves an essential function to protect public health and the environment. Using guiding principle 4, preliminary analysis indicates that relocating the treatment plant would not be cost-effective and that it must be located near the Bay to facilitate discharge of treated effluent. As a result, the RWQCP likely must be protected by levees in the long-term. However, using guiding principle 5, the RWQCP will also need to adapt, including the possible need for new pumps to allow the effluent to discharge to the Bay and the need to construct new facilities with rising groundwater in mind. The RWQCP may also consider use of its effluent to benefit marshes and reduce nutrients, similar to the Oro Loma Ecotone project described above. New buildings at the RWQCP are being built to meet the current flood hazard regulations minimum elevation requirement (Elevation 10.5 feet, NAVD88). In light of guiding principle 1, the City should consider increasing that elevation requirement. When that requirement is changed, new structures at the RWQCP will be constructed in compliance with the modified regulations. 2. The SAFER project described above is designed to protect facilities in the Palo Alto Baylands such as the golf course and airport for at least the next five decades. Should sea level rise be more extreme or occur faster than anticipated over the long term, an analysis would need to be done to determine whether increased protection is cost effective (per guiding principle 4). 3. With the Municipal Service Center (MSC) located in a potential future tidal inundation zone, emergency response capabilities may be affected. Potential future impacts include closure of Highway 101 due to flooding and the inability to get service vehicles from the east side of Highway 101 to the west side and areas within the City needing assistance during flood emergencies. Some of these access problems surfaced during the 70-year City of Palo Alto Page 13 flood event in February 1998. Using all guiding principles, an analysis is needed to determine the best approach to protect the emergency response capabilities and other services that the MSC provides. The ongoing Comprehensive Plan update is an opportunity to further explore the applicability of the listed guiding principles. It is anticipated that the new Comprehensive Plan will include discussion and references related to sustainability, climate change and sea level rise, and their effects. New policies and programs may be drafted to, for example, increase the resilience of areas in the current or future floodplain through zoning changes. As an example, the Alviso Master Plan prepared by the City of San Jose has design guidelines for the “ground floor “flood story” [which] can be used only for parking and incidental storage.” 14 Other considerations could relate to restricting new housing or other sensitive uses east of Highway 101 and other vulnerable areas, a form of managed retreat. The Comprehensive Plan update could be used to trigger consideration of such new requirements. Palo Alto’s proposed actions to address sea level rise vulnerabilities will be further discussed in the future. While Palo Alto should plan and implement its own actions, they must be coordinated with other jurisdictions, as rising waters do not respect political boundaries. A regional response will be critical to a successful outcome. Timeline The following items related to sea level rise will be submitted to the Council for discussion in 2016 unless otherwise noted:  The Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) - development will include adaptation strategies to address climate risks and create a resilient community. In addition, this will include an assessment of Palo Alto’s specific sea level rise and climate risks (S/CAP Appendix F “Climate Adaptation and Vulnerability Analysis”).  The Comprehensive Plan Update - will incorporate sea level rise issues.  The SAFER Bay feasibility study results and recommended levee alignments - will be brought forward in mid-2016; a funding request will be made in 14 https://www.sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/9341 City of Palo Alto Page 14 the proposed FY2017 Capital Improvement Program budget for design and environmental analysis of tidal levee improvements in Palo Alto.  The revised Local Hazard Mitigation and Adaptation Plan - will incorporate plans to mitigate sea level rise such as the SAFER Bay project, and appropriate adapt and retreat strategies.  FEMA’s new Flood Insurance Rate Maps – will expand the footprint of the tidal floodplain in Palo Alto and surrounding communities based on an updated analysis of the existing flood risk.  Modifications to the zoning and floodplain ordinances as needed. Page 1 of 2   CITY OF PALO ALTO       Memorandum TO:      Honorable City Council  FROM:      City Manager DEPARTMENT:  City Manager  AGENDA DATE:   May 31, 2016 SUBJECT:      Council Priorities Work Plan (Update 2nd Quarter 2016)    Attached is a copy of the updated Council Priorities Work Plan for use during your discussion at  the Committee of the Whole on May 31, 2016. The projects on the list stem from your January  2016 Council Retreat.  Some new Council projects have been added and are identified as  “New”.  In addition, we’ve added columns on the right side of the spreadsheet: Impact of  Budget and Current Staffing, and Go or No Go Status field, colored green, yellow, or red (think  traffic lights).  This Work Plan only addresses Projects under the four Council Priority areas.  For example,  pending projects such as the Stanford Fire Service Contract, or Prep for FY 2018 Budget (in the  fall) are not included.  Also, ELT level Priority Projects are not included.  And perhaps the  biggest consumer of staff productivity and provider of service value to our community is not  included‐‐the day to day “routine” work of any City: Police Patrol, Emergency Service response,  Recreation programming, Park maintenance, keeping the lights on, etc. etc. We must  remember that management of those routine services falls to most of the same staff who  support priority projects.   At your meeting, we will also use two 2016 Projects: Housing Options and Eichler Design  Guidelines as “pop‐up” project modifications of scope expansions that illustrate the dynamic  nature of managing the Work Plan during the course of the year. (Memos related to those  topics are also attached.)  Thank you.  JAMES KEENE  City Manager   2016 COUNCIL PRIORITIES  2nd Quarter May 31, 2016  2016 Phase 1 NEW  ITEMS COUNCIL  PRIORITY PROJECT NAME OUTPUT/OUTCOME 2016  ACTION STEPS DEPT.  LEAD  PROJECT  MANAGER DEPT. SUPPORT COUNCIL  RETREAT  RANKING Impact of  Budget and  Current Staffing  on Ability to  Complete Go   OR No  Go 1 IN Post Office Acquire and Renovate  Downtown Post Office for City  Offices Purchase Post Office Develop Funding Plan (including bridge funding at start) Begin Design for Renovation ASD/ CMO PW, DSD, PCE Funding stategy will  need to be developed‐‐ attention to near tern  cash flow 2 BE Local Transportation  Funding [New] Explore local funding  options for transportation  programs and investments as a  way to supplement the County  sales tax measure [New] Undertake polling and outreach to assess the feasibility of a local funding measure in  November 2016 CMO 6 3 BE Business Registry Implement phase two of the  business registry, deliver key  data about businesses in Palo  Alto, plan for integration with  other permits as phase 3 (subject  to Council direction) • Enhance/ Test Upgraded Tool • Launch Renewal Period March 1 • Deliver Upgraded Reports • Plan for integraƟon of other permits to launch in phase 3 CMO DS, PLN, ATY,  ASD, FD, IT 5 Business Registry next  phases slowed down  due to departure of  Economic Deve Mgr 4 CP Sustainability and  Climate Action Plan   (S/CAP) Develop world class goals and  strategy to guide next  generation  sustainability efforts  for City and community. • Produce comprehensive plan and implementaƟon roadmaps to achieve basic and aggressive  greenhouse gas emissions reductions  with measures that are technically, financially, legally and  socially feasible.  • Provide findings and recommendaƟons to Council and community. • Develop process for integraƟon of SCAP and CompPlan • Develop 3-5 year implementaƟon plans for specific SCAP elements CMO DS, PLN, PW  UTL 6 BUDGET: Reduction of  requested contingency  may affect consultant  support. May require  supplement funding to  complete listed tasks.  STAFFING: Will depend  on availability of staff  from other  departments BE: Built Environment     HC : Healthy City    CP : Comprehensive Plan    IN : Infrastructure    O : Other 1  2016 COUNCIL PRIORITIES  2nd Quarter May 31, 2016  2016 Phase 1 NEW  ITEMS COUNCIL  PRIORITY PROJECT NAME OUTPUT/OUTCOME 2016  ACTION STEPS DEPT.  LEAD  PROJECT  MANAGER DEPT. SUPPORT COUNCIL  RETREAT  RANKING Impact of  Budget and  Current Staffing  on Ability to  Complete Go   OR No  Go 5 HC Airplane Noise Continue to work with  Congresswoman Eshoo's Office,  FAA, SFO Roundtable,  Neighboring Cities and Sky Posse 1.  Work through new governance structure-select committee CMO City Attorney,  PWD 5 This is an ever  expanding Project that  appears to be taking  more staff resources  than we have available.  6 HC Neighborhood  Engagement Implement recommendations of  Colleagues Memo dated 4/20/15  expanding engagement with  neighborhood associations. 1) Update Co-Sponsorship Agreement; 2) meeting with neighborhood leaders, to further discuss  development of the City’s Neighborhood Engagement initiative, including association definition,  support models, communication, conflict resolution, ombudsman concept, City’s website and  social media for neighborhoods. 3) Schedule 2016 Town Halls CMO City Attorney,  CSD 3 7 IN Animal Shelter To spin off the animal shelter to  a non-profit organization to have  a robust public private  partnership. 1.  Continue negotiations with Pets in Need 2. Take results to City Council 3. Begin new service model CMO PD Cash Alaee Bob Beacom ASD,  CSD,  ATT 2 Potential minor  increase or net neutral  impact to FY17 budget.   Ongoing long term cost  savings due to reduced  staff costs. 8 CP Baylands  Comprehensive  Conservation Plan Comprehensive plan for effective  management of the Baylands by  balancing ecosystem  conservation with  recreation  and environmental education  opportunities. • Develop conservaƟon goals and strategies   • Develop recreaƟon goals and strategies  • Create and convene a Baylands conservaƟon advisory commiƩee.   • Issue RFP; Award Bid; Create project calendar; Conduct public outreach, involve Parks and Rec  Commission and Council. CSD Kristen O'Kane CSD: Daren  Anderson, Rich  Bicknell, Lisa  Myers, Robbie  Parry 2 Currently proposed to  begin in FY 2017,  however due to budget  constraints may need  to be postponed BE: Built Environment     HC : Healthy City    CP : Comprehensive Plan    IN : Infrastructure    O : Other 2  2016 COUNCIL PRIORITIES  2nd Quarter May 31, 2016  2016 Phase 1 NEW  ITEMS COUNCIL  PRIORITY PROJECT NAME OUTPUT/OUTCOME 2016  ACTION STEPS DEPT.  LEAD  PROJECT  MANAGER DEPT. SUPPORT COUNCIL  RETREAT  RANKING Impact of  Budget and  Current Staffing  on Ability to  Complete Go   OR No  Go 9 HC Project Safety Net Transition Project Safety Net  Community Collaborative to the  Collective Impact framework for  increased effectiveness. • Use the CollecƟve Impact model to develop a roadmap (logic model) to accomplish PSN’s  specified goals and objectives for promoting youth well-being and suicide prevention; • Work with the City and school district to establish an execuƟve board to provide leadership,  guidance and support for PSN’s mission; • Create an expert team to develop a shared data collecƟon system, build overall capacity, and  facilitate communication and collaboration; • Set up a mechanism to elevate, support and measure youth voice within the PSN Community  Collaborative leadership and the work of suicide prevention and youth well-being in the  community; • Evaluate and recommend a fiscal agent for PSN, either the creaƟon of a separate 501c(3) tax  exempt organization, or through an established nonprofit agency to serve as a “backbone”  organization for PSN. • Develop funding plan and parƟcipaƟon CSD Mary Gloner CSD Rob de  Geus, Lacee  Kortsen;  CMO  Jim Keene,  Claudia Keith,  OES 5 Budgeted and  Resourced. On target  to complete by end of  the 2016 calendar year  10 HC Homeless Services Strategic alignment and  investment in regional efforts to  support the unhoused. Formulate options and recommendations  on advancing Palo Alto's involvement CSD Minka van der  Zwaag CSD: Rob de  Geus CMO Jim  Keene, Ed  Shikada; PCE  Jeremy Dennis 4 Not budgeted or  adequately resourced.  There is additional  funding to continue  strategic investment to  house homeless  individuals in  partnership with Santa  Clara County in the  FY17 proposed budget. 11 HC Healthy City Healthy  Community  Resolution Reconvene the Healthy City  Healthy Community working  group to  advance community  health as defined in the Council  adopted Healthy City Healthy  Community Resolution. • Re-convene a diverse stakeholder group • Meet through-out the year to advance the Healthy Cities Healthy Community 2016 work plan:     1. Create a  welcome packet for new residents that orients individuals and families to the  many health and wellness opportunities available in Palo Alto;    2. Include Healthy City/Healthy Community goals, policies and programs in the Comprehensive  Plan Update;    3. Advance specific and safe Bike/Pedestrian Plan projects;    4. Implement a City of Palo Alto Employee Health and Wellness Initiative;    5. In partnership with the business community, coordinate a forum  for local businesses to  share  and learn about workplace health and wellness best practices and encourage the  adoption of similar employee health and wellness initiatives;    6. In partnership with community partners, coordinate an annual Health Fair that promotes  community  health and wellbeing; CSD Kristen O'Kane CSD Rob de  Geus; Minka  van der Zwaag,  Stephanie  Douglas PSO ‐  Rumi Portillo    CMO Claudia  Keith; PCE ‐  Jonathan Lait 3 Budgeted and  Resourced. On target  to complete by end of  the 2016 calendar year  BE: Built Environment     HC : Healthy City    CP : Comprehensive Plan    IN : Infrastructure    O : Other 3  2016 COUNCIL PRIORITIES  2nd Quarter May 31, 2016  2016 Phase 1 NEW  ITEMS COUNCIL  PRIORITY PROJECT NAME OUTPUT/OUTCOME 2016  ACTION STEPS DEPT.  LEAD  PROJECT  MANAGER DEPT. SUPPORT COUNCIL  RETREAT  RANKING Impact of  Budget and  Current Staffing  on Ability to  Complete Go   OR No  Go 12 IN Cubberley Master  Plan Begin the Cubberley Master Plan  process in collaboration with  PAUSD and the community. •  Joint statement on commitment •  Engage the Community in an event at Cubberley begin the public engagement phase of the  Master Plan process •  Leverage Stanford Design School and other partners in a design thinking challenge for process  design •  Seek Board of EducaƟon and Council agreement on a vision, and essenƟal elements needed in  the Master Plan •  Prepare a scope services and release an RFP Cubberley Master Plan design CSD Rob de Geus CSD Kristen  O'Kane, Adam  Howard,  Stephanie  Douglas CMO  Jim Keene,  PWD ‐ Brad  Eggleston 5 Budgeted and  Resourced. On target  to complete by end of  the 2016 calendar year  13 IN Junior Museum &  Zoo Project Develop an agreement between  the Friends of the  Junior  Museum and Zoo and the City of  Palo Alto to rebuild the facility • Complete the design of the new center  •  DraŌ a construcƟon agreement for Council consideraƟon.                                                                     • Complete CEQA requirements.                                                      • Complete a draŌ operaƟng agreement with pro forma reflecƟng the public private partnership  for Council consideration.                                                                                                                                     CSD Rhy Halpern CSD ‐ Rob de  Geus, John  Aikin; ASD ‐  Lalo Perez,  Steve  Guagliardo; PLN‐ Amy French,  Chitra Moitra ;  PW‐Brad  Eggleston,  Elizabeth Ames;  Attorneys ‐  Molly Stump,  3 On target to complete  by end of the 2016  calendar year  14 IN Foothills Park 7.7  Acres Evaluate and recommend to  Council  use of  additional 7.7  acres of dedicated park land  added to Foothills Park..    • Complete the Buckeye Creek hydrology study •  AŌer the Buckeye Creek hydrology study is completed work with the Parks and RecreaƟon  Commission to draft a recommendation for Council on how to use the 7.7 acre  • Evaluate the impacts of the recommendaƟon to Council on the Acterra Nursery lease CSD Daren  Anderson PWD ‐ Brad  Eggleston 1 Budgeted and not fully  resourced causing the  Buckeye Creek  hydrology study to  take longer than  expected to begin ‐  other CIP taking  priority. 15 CP Parks, Trails, Open  Space & Recreation  Master Plan Develop a Parks and Recreation  Master Plan to guide future  renovations, expansions and  improvements • Develop and PrioriƟze Project and Program OpportuniƟes: PreparaƟon of recommendaƟons;  identification of capital projects, needed renovations and other improvements; and  prioritization of projects into an implementation timeline of short (5-year), medium (15- year)  and long-term (20-year) ranges. • Plan Review and AdopƟon: Public, Parks and RecreaƟon Commission (PRC), and Council  review; and Council approval process to adopt the plan. CSD/ PWD Kristen O'Kane CSD ‐ Daren  Anderson,  Kristen O'Kane.  PWD ‐ Peter  Jensen ‐ Brad  Eggleston  5 Resourced however  project budget may  need a change order to  complete by end of the  2016 calendar year  BE: Built Environment     HC : Healthy City    CP : Comprehensive Plan    IN : Infrastructure    O : Other 4  2016 COUNCIL PRIORITIES  2nd Quarter May 31, 2016  2016 Phase 1 NEW  ITEMS COUNCIL  PRIORITY PROJECT NAME OUTPUT/OUTCOME 2016  ACTION STEPS DEPT.  LEAD  PROJECT  MANAGER DEPT. SUPPORT COUNCIL  RETREAT  RANKING Impact of  Budget and  Current Staffing  on Ability to  Complete Go   OR No  Go 16 BE Seismically  Vulnerable Building  Ordinance Update the inventory of  seismically vulnerable buildings  and support City Council  consideration of an ordinance  with priorities and incentives  and requirements for addressing  hazards. • Update inventory of vulnerable buildings and categorize by construcƟon type and occupancy • Research best pracƟces related to prioriƟzaƟon and model ordinances • City Council check-in • Outreach to property owners and stakeholders • Begin draŌing ordinance for review by the City Council DSD PCE 2 Budgeted and  Resourced    OK  17 BE Energy Efficiency  Building Code  toward  Zero Energy  and Carbon  Buildings. Develop an Energy Code that  focuses on energy efficiency and  prepares for the ultimate State  goal of developing buildings to  be energy neutral  • Engage with a multi-stakeholder engagement event that draws opinions & perspectives from  experts in the development industry • Incorporate these & other changing state requirements to ensure our code is able to reflect  these requirements in clear & enforceable language • Prepare adequate cost effectiveness study to comply with California Energy Commission •  City Council Adoption DSD 1 Budgeted and  Resourced 18 BE Construction in the  R-O-W Notification  Tool Develop a tool that is able to  track and prioritize all city  related work in the Right of Way.   The tool will provide notice to  neighbors as well as commuters  by showing all related work on a  map.  The goal is to direct  citizens to one map that will  track all work in the R-O-W  (In  the interim, continue to enhance  home webpage notifications) •  Prepare a SOW that encompasses all the needs of the different departments ; • Go through IT Governance; • Solicit bids and select a vendor; •  Enter into contract with the vendor of choice; • Implement the soluƟon that is department agnosƟc and displays all City Work on one site; •  ConƟnue to monitor and implement the soluƟon. DSD CMO ITS 0 Not Budgeted                   Not Resourced BE: Built Environment     HC : Healthy City    CP : Comprehensive Plan    IN : Infrastructure    O : Other 5  2016 COUNCIL PRIORITIES  2nd Quarter May 31, 2016  2016 Phase 1 NEW  ITEMS COUNCIL  PRIORITY PROJECT NAME OUTPUT/OUTCOME 2016  ACTION STEPS DEPT.  LEAD  PROJECT  MANAGER DEPT. SUPPORT COUNCIL  RETREAT  RANKING Impact of  Budget and  Current Staffing  on Ability to  Complete Go   OR No  Go 19 HC Fire & Rescue -  Community Risk  Reduction Identify opportunities to reduce  community risk, especially in  high risk populations (over age  65, under age 13) •  Determine project scope; • IdenƟfy successful outcomes and community partners; • Meet with prospecƟve consultants who have done similiar projects for local hospitals; •  Enter into contract with the professional services vendor of choice; • Complete study / Implement recommendaƟons; •  ConƟnue to monitor and implement the soluƟon. FIRE Eric Nickel Community  Services, Police,  OES, CMO 1 No funding in FY17.  Reapropriation from  FY16 for study only. No  funds for  implementation.  Staffed with current  EMS Chief and possibly  line personnel working  on this as part of a  special project or  career development. 20 IN Fiber-to-the- Premise Master Plan  Assessment Arrive at a Council-directed  strategy for Palo Alto's approach  to municipal provided fiber-to- the-premise. • Review outside plant build estimates in Master Plan with Citizen Advisory Committee and  document discrepancies.  • Co-build discussion with Third Parties (GF and AT&T) • Develop “Dig Once” Ordinance • Develop and issue Request for Information (RFI) to explore municipally-owned and public- private partnership models for FTTP • Evaluation of RFI responses • Bring recommendation to City Council on co-build and City partnership options • Dependent on City Council direction, begin planning City fiber deployment ITS Legal, Utilities,  Public Works,  City Manager  Office,  Planning,  Development  Services, OES 5 This is a project that  has been susceptible to  changing direction on  objectives and  strategy. Any  significant changes in  direction can impact  schedule and  deliverables. 21 IN Wireless Network  Master Plan  Assessment Arrive at a Council-directed  decision to work with a vendor  to provide a broadband wireless  support infrastructure for Public  Safety and Utilities. • Update citywide wireless network scenarios with 20-year forecasts • Develop cost estimate and fiber backhaul information to expand wireless access in unserved  City facilities and retail areas; develop RFP • Issue RFP for dedicated wireless communications for Public Safety and Utilities • Evaluate RFP responses • Bring recommendation to City Council on provider for Public Safety and Utilities wireless • Dependent on City Council, engage vendor on Public Safety and Utilities wireless build ITS OES, Utilities 1 BE: Built Environment     HC : Healthy City    CP : Comprehensive Plan    IN : Infrastructure    O : Other 6  2016 COUNCIL PRIORITIES  2nd Quarter May 31, 2016  2016 Phase 1 NEW  ITEMS COUNCIL  PRIORITY PROJECT NAME OUTPUT/OUTCOME 2016  ACTION STEPS DEPT.  LEAD  PROJECT  MANAGER DEPT. SUPPORT COUNCIL  RETREAT  RANKING Impact of  Budget and  Current Staffing  on Ability to  Complete Go   OR No  Go 22 BE Library Bike  Outreach 2 bike repair stations installed,  outreach bicycle w/trailer  purchased & in use (Bike PALS),  safe routes to libraries map  completed, training/programs as  part of Summer Reading  Program Received grant, Nov. 2015; Purchase/installation: May 2016; programs: July, 2016 LIB Jenny Jordan PW 0 This is underway, with  100% completion  expected by end of  summer, 2016; only  staff time is part of  FY17 budget. 23 HC New Americans  Project newly-arrived residents will learn  library functions, use, and be  oriented to community  ESL discussion groups began in 2015; outreach to community stakeholders/coordination of  activities to be strengthened in 2016 LIB RuthAnn  Garcia 1 This is underway and  included as part of  FY17 budget; 100%  implementation  expected 24 *New*BE Cal Train Grade  Crossing/ Separation [New] Undertake the analysis,  outreach, and other tasks  necessary to advance grade  separation of Caltrain crossings  in Palo Alto [New] Retain the services of a program manager; undertake a circulation study and "context  sensitive solution" public engagement process; prepare for the preliminary engineering,  environmental review, and review of financing options in future years. PCE None Assigned CMO, City  Attorney, PW 7 Budgeted in the  proposed CIP FY17‐18.   Program manager  must be hired before  progress can be made  on 2016 action steps. 25 BE Bike & Pedestrian  Plan  Implementation Finalize Concept Plan Line work  for 23 ongoing bicycle boulevard  projects and initiate final design  and construction  • Complete final design and iniƟate construcƟon of Churchill Phase I, Maybell, Wilkie, Park, and  Bryant Extension • Complete concept plans and secure approvals for Ross, Amarillo-Moreno, Loma Verde, Bryant  Update • Coordinate with PW in advance of resurfacing projects for striping changes PCE Chris PW, City  Attorney, CMO 6 None; addressed in the  proposed CIP.      26 BE Traffic Signal Timing Update traffic signal timing  where needed • Implement adapƟve traffic signal Ɵming along San Antonio Road • Make other adjustments across the City as needed PCE Rafael Utilities 6 Proposed use of FY16  transportation  contingency to be  considered by the City  Council in June. BE: Built Environment     HC : Healthy City    CP : Comprehensive Plan    IN : Infrastructure    O : Other 7  2016 COUNCIL PRIORITIES  2nd Quarter May 31, 2016  2016 Phase 1 NEW  ITEMS COUNCIL  PRIORITY PROJECT NAME OUTPUT/OUTCOME 2016  ACTION STEPS DEPT.  LEAD  PROJECT  MANAGER DEPT. SUPPORT COUNCIL  RETREAT  RANKING Impact of  Budget and  Current Staffing  on Ability to  Complete Go   OR No  Go 27 *New*BE CEQA -  Transportation  Analysis [New] Dialog regarding existing  transportation impacts analysis  methodologies and thresholds  and upcoming changes in CEQA  significance thresholds [New] Convene a study session with the City Council; participate in VTA's process to amend their  guidelines in response to changes in State law PCE Josh City Attorney 5 Study session will be  scheduled for August  or September.   No  work is currently  programmed after the  study session except  for continued  coordination with VTA  on updated guidelines. 28 BE Midtown Connector  Project Evaluate the feasibility of East- West Bicycle and Pedestrian  Connections through Midtown  and design preferred options for  construction • Contract amendment • Complete feasibility study • Council direcƟon • Complete concept plan line & final design PCE Josh CMO, City  Attorney, PW 4 Staff vacancies may  slow down project  delivery if decision is  made to proceed once  the feasibility study is  complete. 29 BE Annual (Land Use)  Code Update Undertake an annual review of  code interpretations and needed  zoning code (clean-up) changes. • Work with the City AƩorney to idenƟfy needed technical correcƟons and clarificaƟons • Present an ordinance for consideraƟon by the PTC and the City Council PCE Amy City Attorney 4 Carry‐over item from  2015 scheduled for  ARB and City Council  review later this year.   Additional "clean‐up"  ordinance will be  deferred to 2017.  30 *New*BE Housing Micro Units [New] Council requested a  "pilot" program to encourage  small units with reduced parking  downtown on 3/21/16 TBD PCE None Assigned City Attorney,  CMO 4  No consultant support  has been funded.  No  staffing available.  Not  feasible ahead of the  Comp Plan unless  proposed by a single  property owner (which  may occur).   BE: Built Environment     HC : Healthy City    CP : Comprehensive Plan    IN : Infrastructure    O : Other 8  2016 COUNCIL PRIORITIES  2nd Quarter May 31, 2016  2016 Phase 1 NEW  ITEMS COUNCIL  PRIORITY PROJECT NAME OUTPUT/OUTCOME 2016  ACTION STEPS DEPT.  LEAD  PROJECT  MANAGER DEPT. SUPPORT COUNCIL  RETREAT  RANKING Impact of  Budget and  Current Staffing  on Ability to  Complete Go   OR No  Go 31 BE Next RPP  Implementation Implement RPP in the next  priority neighborhoods  (Evergreen Park and Southgate) • Review applicaƟons received (March) and prioriƟze next RPP district • Work with neighborhood stakeholders to develop  program parameters • Prepare a resoluƟon and contract amendments for Council consideraƟon • ImplementaƟon PCE Sue-Ellen City Attorney,  CMO 4 Proposed FY17 budget  is being adjusted to  accommodate two new  RPP districts.  Staff  vacancies and follow‐ up work on the  Downtown RPP will  affect the date of  program(s) delivery  and adoption. 32 BE Retail Preservation  Ordinance (Cal Ave)  follow-up Support City Council  Consideration of Potential  Modifications to Retail  Protections in the Cal Ave area • Analyze parking requirements. • Analyze retail feasibility on Cambridge • Council direcƟon • Develop revisions to adopted ordinance for consideraƟon. PCE None Assigned City Attorney 4 Funding proposed for a  consultant contract in  the FY17 budget is  being reallocated to  RPP. This project will  be unfunded.  Staff  support is not available  unless other projects  are deferred. 33 BE Paid Parking Study Analyze parking downtown and  consider paid parking  alternatives • Establish a stakeholder group • Complete data collecƟon • Analyze issues and opportuniƟes • Present for Council direcƟon • Finalize recommendaƟons PCE Sue-Ellen City Attorney 3 None 34 *New*BE Rental Costs [New] Incentives for Moderate  Income Housing TBD PCE None Assigned City Attorney,  CMO 3 No consultant support  is currently budgeted.   Developing a new  program will not be  feasible in 2016 unless  other projects are  deferred. 35 BE Parking Access/ Revenue Controls Implement garage technologies  based on paid parking study  recommendations • Stakeholder input on goals and deleƟons • RecommendaƟon to Council PCE None Assigned City Attorney 3 Project is on hold  awaiting completion of  the paid parking study. BE: Built Environment     HC : Healthy City    CP : Comprehensive Plan    IN : Infrastructure    O : Other 9  2016 COUNCIL PRIORITIES  2nd Quarter May 31, 2016  2016 Phase 1 NEW  ITEMS COUNCIL  PRIORITY PROJECT NAME OUTPUT/OUTCOME 2016  ACTION STEPS DEPT.  LEAD  PROJECT  MANAGER DEPT. SUPPORT COUNCIL  RETREAT  RANKING Impact of  Budget and  Current Staffing  on Ability to  Complete Go   OR No  Go 36 BE Review Office & R/D  use categories in  zoning Review and update definitions of  "Office", "R&D", etc. as needed. • PTC work sessions • Public input • Council direcƟon • Prepare Ordinance to make changes. PCE None Assigned City Attorney 3 Not  feasible with  current staff vacancies  unless other projects  are deferred; re‐ evaluate when  vacancies are filled.  37 BE Housing: Second  Dwelling units Consider changes in policy and  regulations to incentivize  additional dwelling units  ("granny units"). • PTC direcƟon and data collecƟon. • Analysis of opƟons for consideraƟon. • City Council direcƟon. • Develop ordinance for consideraƟon. PCE Chitra City Attorney 2 Staff vacancies may  slow down 2016 tasks.  Pending State  legislation will also  affect the development  of new ADUs. 38 *New*BE Vacation Rentals  Ordinance [New] Adopt regulations  regarding short term vacation  rentals in Palo Alto TBD PCE None Assigned City Attorney,  ASD, CMO 2 Developing new  regulations in 2016 will  not be feasible unless  other priorities are  eliminated.  39 *New*BE C22 Zoning  Amendment [New] Prepare an Ordinance  adjusting the allowable FAR in  the C22 zoning district TBD PCE None Assigned City Attorney 2 Not feasible with  current staff resources  and priorities; suggest  implementing  concurrent with Comp  Plan adoption. 40 BE Parking Guidance  Systems  Implement technologies that  make it easier for drivers to find  parking. Including Garages • Complete design of parking guidance systems in tandem with wayfinding • Bid construcƟon and award contract & ImplementaƟon PCE None Assigned City Attorney,  PW, IT 2 Project is currently  unfunded. The ongoing  paid parking study will  examine the potential  for financing with  parking revenues.  BE: Built Environment     HC : Healthy City    CP : Comprehensive Plan    IN : Infrastructure    O : Other 10  2016 COUNCIL PRIORITIES  2nd Quarter May 31, 2016  2016 Phase 1 NEW  ITEMS COUNCIL  PRIORITY PROJECT NAME OUTPUT/OUTCOME 2016  ACTION STEPS DEPT.  LEAD  PROJECT  MANAGER DEPT. SUPPORT COUNCIL  RETREAT  RANKING Impact of  Budget and  Current Staffing  on Ability to  Complete Go   OR No  Go 41 BE Shuttle Expansion Expand shuttle service and  implement other strategies to  increase ridership Determine strategy and form Develop and implement a coordinated design and markeƟng program to include schedules,  stops, vehicles, and the web/mobile aps Design service changes and expansions to make the shuƩle more convenient for more people Public input City Council review of staff recommendaƟons ImplementaƟon PCE Sue-Ellen City Attorney 2 Planning phase can  be  completed once VTA  service changes are  understood;  implementation of  shuttle service  improvements and  rebranding is currently  unfunded.  42 BE IR Program review Conduct an impartial review of  the IR process and recommend  any necessary changes. • Develop report based on input from stakeholders • Suggest updates to the guidelines and implemenƟng ordinance as needed • Review report with the PTC & City Council PCE Anu City Attorney 2 IR Review can be  completed but IR  Guideline amendments  and/or Eichler‐specific  guidelines will take  additional consultant  resources (see below).  43 *New*BE Eichler Specific  Guidelines Prepare amendments to the IR  Guidelines or Eichler-specific  design guidelines to address two  story homes in Eichler  neighborhoods Issue RFP and hire a design professional to manage the project; community engagement; draft  document preparation PCE None Assigned City Attorney Funding is currently  proposed in the form  of a planning and  transportation  contingency in FY17.  44 BE Quarry Road  Pedestrian & Bicycle  Improvements Design and implement  pedestrian and bike  improvements connecting the  Transit Center to SUMC  • Award design contract • Complete Design • Bid and award construcƟon contract PCE Shahla Purchasing Public Works City Attorney CSD 1 None. Funded with  SUMC fees.  45 BE Embarcadero Road  Phase II Design and construct traffic,  pedestrian, and bicycle  improvements for Embarcadero  between El Camino Real and  Alma Street • Contract Award • Public input and Caltrans CoordinaƟon • Conceptual Design Approvals PCE Shahla PAUSD 1 CIP funding for  construction in FY18‐ 19 BE: Built Environment     HC : Healthy City    CP : Comprehensive Plan    IN : Infrastructure    O : Other 11  2016 COUNCIL PRIORITIES  2nd Quarter May 31, 2016  2016 Phase 1 NEW  ITEMS COUNCIL  PRIORITY PROJECT NAME OUTPUT/OUTCOME 2016  ACTION STEPS DEPT.  LEAD  PROJECT  MANAGER DEPT. SUPPORT COUNCIL  RETREAT  RANKING Impact of  Budget and  Current Staffing  on Ability to  Complete Go   OR No  Go 46 BE Housing Impact Fee  Update Adopt and implement updated  impact fees to fund affordable  housing. • Present Nexus study and fee recommendaƟons to the Finance CommiƩee. • ConsideraƟon of Ordinance by the City Council.PCE Eloiza City Attorney,  ASD 1 None. 47 BE Professorville  Design Guidelines Complete neighborhood specific  design guidelines • Reach out to stakeholders in Professorville regarding the objecƟves and scope of the work. • Obtain grant funds and retain outside consultant. • Finalize recommendations and agendize for review by the PTC and City Council. PCE Matt City Attorney 1 None. 48 BE Parking Study of  Housing Types Prepare a study to ensure  adequate parking for housing  approved per State Density  Bonus law • RFP and Consultant SelecƟon • Data collecƟon • Review draŌ recommendaƟons and prepare Ordinance PCE None Assigned City Attorney Purchasing 1 Not proposed for  funding.  49 BE Speed Survey  Updates Develop new speed surveys to  allow for traffic enforcement • Bid and award contract • Conduct surveys • Recommend adjustments to posted speed limits and concurrent safety improvements as  needed                                   •  Implement desired changes PCE Ruchika Police 0 Funded in current fiscal  year; phase one to  begin in FY17  50 BE CPI Draft an Ordinance for  consideration by the City Council  regarding siting and risks  associated with plating shops of  similar uses. DraŌ an Ordinance for consideraƟon by the PTC and the City Council PCE Hillary City Attorney 0 Complete * 51 BE Geng Road  Circulation &  Embarcadero Road  Parking Study Examine possible circulation  improvements and additional  parking east of 101 • Complete circulaƟon and parking Study • Develop recommendaƟons for review by PTC and City Council PCE None Assigned Purchasing 0 Not proposed for  funding.  BE: Built Environment     HC : Healthy City    CP : Comprehensive Plan    IN : Infrastructure    O : Other 12  2016 COUNCIL PRIORITIES  2nd Quarter May 31, 2016  2016 Phase 1 NEW  ITEMS COUNCIL  PRIORITY PROJECT NAME OUTPUT/OUTCOME 2016  ACTION STEPS DEPT.  LEAD  PROJECT  MANAGER DEPT. SUPPORT COUNCIL  RETREAT  RANKING Impact of  Budget and  Current Staffing  on Ability to  Complete Go   OR No  Go 52 BE Ground Floor Retail  Protection (Other  Commercial  Districts) Evaluate other  protections/changes needed to  preserve GF retail outside of  Downtown and Cal. Ave. • Outreach to stakeholders and property owners • Analysis of issues and alternaƟves • Council direcƟon • Prepare ordinance for consideraƟon by PTC and CC PCE None Assigned City Attorney CMO 0 Not feasible with  current staff vacancies;  re‐evaluate when  vacancies are filled and  reevaluation of retail  protections in the Cal  Ave and Downtown  areas are complete.  53 BE TMA Support Support efforts of the newly  established Transportation  Management Association (TMA)  aimed at reducing SOV trips  downtown Council study session; council consideration of pilot funding agreement with conditions; annual  survey of commuters; oversight and support of TMA activities PCE Sue-Ellen City Attorney,  CMO None. 54 BE Downtown Mobility  Study Design and implement needed  mobility and safety  improvements downtown RFP & consultant selection; study of existing mobility & safety challenges and opportunities;  development and testing of alternatives; public engagement; PTC & Council review and approval  and final design and construction in 2017/18 PCE Jarrett City Attorney,  Public Works,  CMO Staff vacancies may  affect timing of the  study.  CIP funding for  construction in FY18‐ 19. 55 BE Retail Preservation  Ordinance (Downtown) Support City Council  Consideration of Potential  Modifications to Retail  Protections in Downtown. •  Data collecƟon and analysis of retail trends • Outreach to stakeholders • Return to City Council for direcƟon • DraŌ one or more ordinances for consideraƟon by the PTC and the City Council PCE None Assigned City Attorney CMO Final tasks may be  deferred to 2017  because of current  staff vacancies; can  happen before the  interim ordinance  expires. BE: Built Environment     HC : Healthy City    CP : Comprehensive Plan    IN : Infrastructure    O : Other 13  2016 COUNCIL PRIORITIES  2nd Quarter May 31, 2016  2016 Phase 1 NEW  ITEMS COUNCIL  PRIORITY PROJECT NAME OUTPUT/OUTCOME 2016  ACTION STEPS DEPT.  LEAD  PROJECT  MANAGER DEPT. SUPPORT COUNCIL  RETREAT  RANKING Impact of  Budget and  Current Staffing  on Ability to  Complete Go   OR No  Go 56 CP Housing Element  Implementation    Part I • Consider eliminaƟon of sites on  San Antonio/S El Camino &  replacement with higher  densities on existing sites or the  addition of new sites (in the  Comp Plan process) • Consider code changes to  encourage more, smaller units  (in the Comp Plan process) • Consider small lot  consolidation incentives • Council direcƟon re: sites and programs. • Develop draŌ ordinance(s) for public input and PTC/Council review PCE Eloiza City Attorney 6 Can be staffed as part  of the Comp Plan effort  (relocation of sites &  desired code changes)  and after the housing  impact fee update is  complete (small lot  consolidation). 57 CP Comp Plan Update Develop world class policy  framework to guide City and  community decision making to  the year 2030. • CAC review and recommendaƟon for all elements. • City Council review of CAC work and direcƟon on key issues. • DraŌ EIR and responses to comments. (see schedule) PCE Elaine City Attorney,  CSD, OES, CMO 4 Analysis of a 5th and  6th scenarios in the EIR  is contingent on a  further amendment to  the Placeworks  contract.  Limited  staffing means that  subcommittee  meetings of the CAC  must be spaced‐out  and mostly scheduled  during the day. 58 CP Downtown CAP Develop and Implement policy  and code changes to update the  Downtown CAP on Non- Residential square footage • Complete consultant study and outline policy opƟons. • Council input/direcƟon • Prepare Comp. Plan policy language and code changes. PCE Chitra City Attorney 2 Policy discussion and  code changes (third  bullet) will coincide  with Comp Plan  Update.  59 CP Build to Line Ordinance to increase setbacks  on El Camino Real Schedule ordinance recommended by the PTC for consideration by the City Council; include  related policies and programs in the Comp Plan Update PCE Amy City Attorney 1 This initiative is not  currently staffed due  to other Department  priorities. BE: Built Environment     HC : Healthy City    CP : Comprehensive Plan    IN : Infrastructure    O : Other 14  2016 COUNCIL PRIORITIES  2nd Quarter May 31, 2016  2016 Phase 1 NEW  ITEMS COUNCIL  PRIORITY PROJECT NAME OUTPUT/OUTCOME 2016  ACTION STEPS DEPT.  LEAD  PROJECT  MANAGER DEPT. SUPPORT COUNCIL  RETREAT  RANKING Impact of  Budget and  Current Staffing  on Ability to  Complete Go   OR No  Go 60 BE Mobility App or  "wallet" along the  lines of "MAAS" Explore development of an App  to make transportation more  convenient • RFP • Consultant selecƟon and data collecƟon • Review draŌ with stakeholders • Review with PTC and City Council • Build App if feasible PCE/ CMO  None Assigned Sustainability Purchasing HR, IT, City  Attorney 4 Contingent on receipt  of regional  transportation funding  (from MTC) for this  purpose.  Staff has not  been assigned to this  initiative. 61 *New*HC Means Restriction This project has been broken out  separately from the Project  Safety Net Project Track Guard Security oversight Intrusion Detection System Fencing installation Additional means restriction efforts  PD/ OES Ken Dueker PD Bob  Beacom, Dennis  Burns; CMO Jim  Keene, Claudia  Keith, Ed  Shikada Intrusion Detection  and Fencing not  budgeted.  62 BE Charleston/Arastrad ero Corridor Project Preliminary design and  environmental assessment for  the corridor project from Fabian  Way to Miranda Avenue • Community Outreach on Landscaping PaleƩe • Coordinate with Caltrans and JPB/Caltrain • Complete NEPA process • Develop final design to 65% level PW PCE 2 None 63 BE Dewatering Address public concerns  regarding basement construction  dewatering Develop new requirements for basement construction dewatering PW 1 None; new  requirements are being  implemented in pilot  program, but it is too  early to judge their  success 64 CP Recycled Water  (S/CAP link) Expand recycled water use by  imposing recycled water quality  by advanced water treatment  feasibility study and develop a  recycled water strategic planning  effort within North Santa Clara  County Contract with consultant for RO Feasibility Study ; contract with consultant for Recycled Water  Strategic Planning and Groundwater Management Plan; Partner funding agreements with  SCVWD and City of Mountain View; Decide Go/No Go On Recycled Water extension to Research  Park PW Utl, Atty 3 Water district Funding  appears to be  committed , but mostly  not available until July  1, 2016; Other  agencies are  supportive, New City  Staffer approved by  Finance Committee for  FY 2017 BE: Built Environment     HC : Healthy City    CP : Comprehensive Plan    IN : Infrastructure    O : Other 15  2016 COUNCIL PRIORITIES  2nd Quarter May 31, 2016  2016 Phase 1 NEW  ITEMS COUNCIL  PRIORITY PROJECT NAME OUTPUT/OUTCOME 2016  ACTION STEPS DEPT.  LEAD  PROJECT  MANAGER DEPT. SUPPORT COUNCIL  RETREAT  RANKING Impact of  Budget and  Current Staffing  on Ability to  Complete Go   OR No  Go 65 CP Urban Forest Master  Plan Continue to work with  community and environmental  representatives to finalize the  Urban Forest Masterplan while  completing the implementation  of the plan. 1.Continue to analyze funding and staffing levels necessary to implement this plan.                            2. Complete phase 1 of implementation                                      3. Begin phase 2 of implementation          4. Report back to council fall of 2017 to seek final adoption of the plan.          PW Walter  Passmore Development  Services, CMO,  Utilities,  1 Staffing levels currently  under evaluation.  Additional funding will  be required to  implement the plan  fully. This will have an  impact on our ability to  complete this project. 66 HC Smoking Ban Restrict smoking in multifamily  areas and establish tobacco  retailer licensing PW PD, PCE 3 Staff time not available  to establish smoking  restrictions inside  Multifamily units.  County cooperative but  slow on retailer  licensing for PA 67 IN Public Safety  Building Project Create a new facility built to  Essential Services standards to  house Police, 911 Dispatch,  Emergency Services, Fire Admin,  and the Emergency Operations  Center on parking lot C-6 • Hire ConstrucƟon Management (CM) firm to assist with project. • Hire Architect and begin design development and EIR. • Complete pre-design and schematic design phases. • Begin design development phase. PW PD, Fire, OES,  and IT will be  engaged in the  design process 6 Budget and staffing are  in place pending  approval of Program  Manager contract 68 IN Downtown Parking  Garage Finalize location, select design  concept, begin preliminary  design Return to Council for further policy direction with assistance from Planning PW Planning will be  leading the  policy  discussion 5 No funds Budgeted.   Garage is in the IMP 69 IN California Ave  Parking Garage Create a new parking garage  with a retail element on existing  surface parking lot C-7 to create  at least 150 additional parking  stalls and replace parking to be  lost by siting the PSB on the  adjacent parking lot • Hire ConstrucƟon Management (CM) firm to assist with project. • Hire Architect and begin design development and EIR. • Complete schematic design and select preferred configuration. PW Planning will be  engaged in the  design process 5 Budget and staffing are  in place pending  approval of Program  Manager contract BE: Built Environment     HC : Healthy City    CP : Comprehensive Plan    IN : Infrastructure    O : Other 16  2016 COUNCIL PRIORITIES  2nd Quarter May 31, 2016  2016 Phase 1 NEW  ITEMS COUNCIL  PRIORITY PROJECT NAME OUTPUT/OUTCOME 2016  ACTION STEPS DEPT.  LEAD  PROJECT  MANAGER DEPT. SUPPORT COUNCIL  RETREAT  RANKING Impact of  Budget and  Current Staffing  on Ability to  Complete Go   OR No  Go 70 IN Highway 101  Pedestrian/ Bicycle Overcrossing  at Adobe Creek Select design concept and begin  preliminary design for new, year- round Pedestrian/Bicycle  Overcrossing • Select a design consultant through a Request for Proposal process by February 2016. • Begin design in March 2016.  • Complete development of 65% design documents. • Complete environmental studies and documentation. PW PCE 5 None;  however,  updated schedule  begins design in June  and last two bullets will  not be achieved in  2016 71 IN Fire Station No. 3  Replacement Rebuild Fire Station No.3 at  Embarcadero Road and Newell  Road •  Begin Fire StaƟon and temporary facility design. • Select location for temporary station. • Complete pre-design, schematic design, and design development • Hire construction management firm & begin contractor pre-qualification PW Fire, OES and IT  will be engaged  in the design  process 2 Budget and staffing are  in place pending  approval of Program  Manager contract 72 IN Golf Course  Reconfiguration Complete reconstruction of the  Golf Course, including substantial  regrading, new irrigation system,  and environmental  enhancements • Secure regulatory permits. • Award construction contract. • Complete 50% of project construction. PW CSD 2 Current budget is not  adequate to award  construction contract  due to high bids; still  not full certainty  regarding regulatory  permits 73 IN Ventura Building  Improvements Replace or upgrade the  mechanical and electrical  systems and provide accessibility  improvements to the Ventura  Community Center facility •  Complete ADA assessment of the facility •  Hire design firm •  Complete pre-design, schemaƟc design, and design development phases •  Begin construction documents and apply for permits PW CSD and ASD  will be engaged  during the  design process 2 Potential delay due to  funding capital fund  budget constraints and  staff workloads with  post office  prioritization 74 IN Matadero Creek  Storm Water Pump  Station  Improvements Capacity upgrade to the  Matadero Creek Storm Water  Pump Station, an essential  element of the storm drain  system serving a 1,250-acre  watershed area • Complete project design. • Award construction project. • Complete 33% of project construction. PW 2 None 75 IN Street Resurfacing  Program Continue resurfacing streets to  meet average citywide pavement  condition index (PCI) score of 85  by 2019 • Complete paving of 70 city blocks        -   includes 18 blocks to finish paving Middlefield and Alma with additional funding over 3  years • Complete prevenƟve maintenance of 80 city blocks  • ConƟnue frequent community outreach • Raise citywide PCI score to 82 PW UTL 1 None BE: Built Environment     HC : Healthy City    CP : Comprehensive Plan    IN : Infrastructure    O : Other 17  2016 COUNCIL PRIORITIES  2nd Quarter May 31, 2016  2016 Phase 1 NEW  ITEMS COUNCIL  PRIORITY PROJECT NAME OUTPUT/OUTCOME 2016  ACTION STEPS DEPT.  LEAD  PROJECT  MANAGER DEPT. SUPPORT COUNCIL  RETREAT  RANKING Impact of  Budget and  Current Staffing  on Ability to  Complete Go   OR No  Go 76 IN Baylands  Interpretive Center  Improvements Improvements to aging Center  including Boardwalk repair  feasibility study, and  replacement of Center railing,  decking, siding, flooring,  cabinetry and doors • Complete Boardwalk Feasibility Study. • Secure funding for boardwalk design and construction and complete design • Complete design development for the Interpretive Center • Obtain environmental and construction permits for the Interpretive Center • Bid out the Interpretive Center project and begin construction. PW CSD 1 None; however,  uncertainty in timing of  regulatory permits and  short construction  season could push  construction to fall  2017 77 IN Organics Facilities  Plan Replace incinerators with new  biosolids handling system • Obtain approval of Dewatering Building from the ARB and the Planning Commission.  • Complete 100% design drawings.  • Prepare and issue IFB.  • Select Contractor and award Contact.  • Begin ConstrucƟon. PW PCE 1 ARB approval  completed, but lated,  East Palo Alto Sanitary  District has not  approved agreement &  therefore loan cannot  be obtained, and  project cannot go out  to bid immediately, as  hoped. 78 IN Newell Road/San  Francisquito Creek  Bridge Replacement Replacement of functionally- obsolete Newell Road bridge  over San Francisquito Creek to  provide increased creek flow  capacity in coordination with the  San Francisquito Creek JPA • Circulate draft of project Environmental Impact Report. • Initiate project permitting. • Complete preliminary bridge design. PW PCE 1 None; however, newly  required traffic count  data gathering may  delay the preliminary  bridge design beyond  the 2016 schedule 79 IN Sidewalk Repairs  Project Continue sidewalk repairs to  complete 30 year district cycle  leveraging budget doubled per  IBRC recommendations • Complete sidewalk program assessment to set new program goals and standards. • Complete 30-year district cycle including sidewalk repairs in Sidewalk Replacement Districts 25,  32 and 36 PW UTL 0 None 80 IN SF Creek JPA Project Build downstream 101 Section of  Flood Control Project • Obtain final permits from State & Feds • Approve Funding Agreement (gap funding) • Approve ConstrucƟon Contract • Begin ConstrucƟon PW CMO, City  Attorney BE: Built Environment     HC : Healthy City    CP : Comprehensive Plan    IN : Infrastructure    O : Other 18  2016 COUNCIL PRIORITIES  2nd Quarter May 31, 2016  2016 Phase 1 NEW  ITEMS COUNCIL  PRIORITY PROJECT NAME OUTPUT/OUTCOME 2016  ACTION STEPS DEPT.  LEAD  PROJECT  MANAGER DEPT. SUPPORT COUNCIL  RETREAT  RANKING Impact of  Budget and  Current Staffing  on Ability to  Complete Go   OR No  Go 81 IN Lucie Stern  Mechanical &  Electrical Upgrades Rehabilitate and improve the  existing building systems  including fire/life safety  components for Lucie Stern  Community Center, the  Children’s Theater and the  Community Theater Award Construction Contract PW CSD will be  engaged during  the  construction  process 0 Current budget is not  adequate to award  construction contract  due to high bids;  project may be broken  into phases 82 BE Customer  Information System  / Smart Grid The Utility Billing and Smart Grid  systems are highly integrated.   Smart grid systems enable many  alternatives such as the ability to  offer time of use rate schedules  and other information that  promote energy conservation,  reduce carbon emission, improve  system reliability and provide  real-time customer usage  information. • Develop billing system specificaƟons in parallel with City's ERP system • Select vendor and implement new billing system • Develop meter data management specificaƟons • Evaluate advanced meter infrastructure for electric, gas and water UTL Dave Yuan 1 Project proceeding on  multiyear timeline 83 IN Local Solar  Generation Plan  Council adopted the Local Solar  Plan, which establishes the goal  of meeting 4% of the City’s  energy needs from local solar by  2023 • Launch community solar program to allow those who wish to access solar energy, but don’t  have adequate on-site access. • Develop a solar donaƟon program. • ConƟnue Palo Alto CLEAN program. • Develop Net Energy Metering Successor Program and Rates UTL Jane Ratchye PWD, OES 4 Program manager  recently left City,  position being  recruited.  Community  solar program  dependent on  availability and timing  of suitable site(s). 84 IN Second electric  transmission  interconnection plan  The new 60kV line would  improve the City's transmission  service reliability with potential  cost savings/ Alternatives review • Joint evaluaƟon of feasibility studies with SLAC, Stanford and possibly  PG&E, DOE and WAPA •  Preliminary design of the interconnecƟon plan • TentaƟve MOA with Stanford and SLAC • ConƟnue to monitor PG&E and CAISO transmission acƟviƟes UTL Tomm  Marshall 3 Project partially  funded, full funds  dependent on Stanford  University agreement BE: Built Environment     HC : Healthy City    CP : Comprehensive Plan    IN : Infrastructure    O : Other 19  2016 COUNCIL PRIORITIES  2nd Quarter May 31, 2016  2016 Phase 1 NEW  ITEMS COUNCIL  PRIORITY PROJECT NAME OUTPUT/OUTCOME 2016  ACTION STEPS DEPT.  LEAD  PROJECT  MANAGER DEPT. SUPPORT COUNCIL  RETREAT  RANKING Impact of  Budget and  Current Staffing  on Ability to  Complete Go   OR No  Go 85 BE Fuel Switching /  Electrification Evaluate potential electrification  programs and incentives for the  community to reduce  greenhouse gas emissions by  replacing the use of natural gas  and gasoline with electricity for  building appliances and vehicles. • Implement a pilot program for heat pump water heaters in exisƟng homes to determine cost- effectiveness and identify obstacles to installation. • Provide resources to homeowners to convert exisƟng homes to all-electric homes. • Evaluate retail electric rate schedule for home electrificaƟon. • Explore building code changes for new construcƟon and remodeling projects. • Promote installaƟon of EV supply equipment. UTL DSD Jane Ratchye Development  Services,  Sustainability  Office 1 Project funded at  pilot/evaluation level. 86 *New*BE Middlefield Road  Safety Study Assess safety at intersections  along Middlefield Road near  Menlo Park and implement  needed improvements. Analyze safety after one year trial of time-of-day turn restrictions; community engagement and  analysis of potential improvements; City Council direction/approval; implementation  Rafael CMO, City  Attorney, PW Funding is currently  proposed in the form  of a planning and  transportation  contingency in FY17.  87 BE Employment Center Added by Council at Retreat?1 88 HC Focus on Service for  Vulnerable Groups Added by Council at Retreat?4 BE: Built Environment     HC : Healthy City    CP : Comprehensive Plan    IN : Infrastructure    O : Other 20 May 23, 2016 DRAFT  Page 1  TO:   James Keene, City Manager    FROM:  Hillary Gitelman, Director of Planning & Community Environment    RE: Council Requests Regarding Eichler‐Specific Guidelines     This memo provides responses to the City Council’s request that planning staff assess the ability to  undertake development of new Eichler‐specific amendments to the Individual Review (IR) Guidelines  and/or develop separate design guidelines or zoning regulations to guide development of two story  homes in Eichler neighborhoods, as well as amendments to the process for assessing resident support  for new Single Story Overlay (SSO) districts.      Executive Summary  We appreciate the desire to amend the Individual Review (IR) Guidelines and/or develop separate  design guidelines or regulations to guide development of new two story homes in Eichler  neighborhoods. With sufficient resources, this project could be undertaken as a consultant‐led effort  after completion of the IR program review and the Professorville Design Guidelines (both are wrapping  up soon).  Amendments to the petition process for new SSO districts can be developed by staff and  considered by the City Council in the context of the next “code clean‐up” ordinance, expected in 2017.       Background  On May 2, 2016, Council directed staff to evaluate the feasibility of undertaking two possible initiatives  in response to controversy surrounding the construction of two story homes in Eichler neighborhoods:    A. Conduct a preliminary evaluation of a potential Eichler Overlay Zone or Strengthening of  IR guidelines for Eichler design and privacy compatibility (for second story additions);  and   B. Explore options for breaking up the petition and 'voting' process to determine the level  of support for Single Story Overlays and Eichler Overlays.    The issues addressed by this motion are related to some of the Planning Department’s “Council Priority  Projects” for 2016 as discussed by the City Council at their retreat in late January.  At that time, the  priority projects included a review of the Individual Review (IR) process for two story homes and  development of recommendations for improving this program, and also included an annual “code clean‐ up” project.  To reflect the Council’s May 2nd motion, a new project related to Eichler neighborhoods has  been added to the list of priority projects and has been proposed for funding in a “contingency” within  the FY17 proposed budget.      Discussion  In its motion on May 6, the Council requested staff evaluate the feasibility of undertaking two different  approaches to the issue of two story homes in Eichler neighborhoods.  The feasibility of the various  components of the motion varies quite a bit, and is discussed further below.      A. Adopt an Eichler Overlay Zone or strengthen the IR guidelines for Eichler design compatibility and  privacy.  This proposal will require consultant support in the form of an architect or urban design  professional with an affinity for mid‐century modern residential architecture.  While not currently  budgeted, such an individual could conduct community outreach and develop design guidelines  specific to Eichler neighborhoods as other jurisdictions have done, and/or develop regulations to be  May 23, 2016 DRAFT  Page 2  adopted as part of the IR Guidelines or the municipal code.  This planning effort would be  strengthened if it also involved preparation of a “context statement” to support evaluation of the  City’s Eichler neighborhoods in terms of their architectural integrity and significance.       Staff believes that preparation of a “context statement” may be eligible for grant funding from the  State Office of Historic Preservation (similar to the Professorville Guidelines which are currently  being wrapped up).  General fund resources would be needed for the project manager/design  consultant, and staff has proposed this be funded through a “contingency” in the FY17 budget.  The  project can be initiated as soon as the project manager is retained.  Staff estimates it will take 16‐18  months from start to finish, assuming mid‐course check‐ins with the City Council do not result in  additional/modified direction requiring additional effort.        B. Improve the petition process to determine the level of support for Single Story Overlays (and  potentially Eichler Overlays).  Staff can easily include improvements to the SSO process in the next  regular “code clean‐up” ordinance, which is scheduled for 2017. The only clean‐up planned for 2016  is the update to the ARB findings, which was referred back to the ARB when the City Council  considered the 2015 code clean‐up ordinance.     Conclusion  These are interesting issues that can be tackled in the coming year presuming budget and consultant  resources are available.           May 26, 2016 DRAFT  Page 1  TO:   James Keene, City Manager    FROM:  Hillary Gitelman, Director of Planning & Community Environment    RE: Council Requests Regarding Housing Policy Items     This memo provides responses to the City Council’s request that planning staff assess the ability to  undertake a number of new projects related to housing policy matters.  It is intended to be read in  conjunction with the current list of “Council Priority Projects” and to facilitate a discussion of adjusting  priorities for the second half of 2016 if desired.      [Please note that this analysis does not address or factor in the Governor’s May 2016 proposal to  streamline multifamily housing by eliminating local discretion when affordable units are proposed in  projects that conform with local zoning.  Staff is analyzing the Governor’s proposal ,   http://budgettrack.blob.core.windows.net/btdocs2016/1185.pdfhttp://budgettrack.blob.core.windows.n et/btdocs2016/1185.pdf, and will provide additional information/analysis as soon as possible.]    Executive Summary  Staff appreciates the Council’s attention to housing questions and would be thrilled to make significant  progress on housing policies and regulations, however current staffing levels (due to vacant positions)  and the number of other, ongoing projects will make this difficult in the near term.  There are also  challenges associated with sequencing some of the Council’s housing policy ideas ahead of the  Comprehensive Plan and its associated environmental impact report (EIR).  In the discussion below, we  provide further explanation of these conclusions and indicate how the Council’s suggested projects  might be tackled, and when re‐prioritizing other ongoing projects might enable staff to get started on  them sooner.    Background  On March 21, 2016, the City Council adopted a motion requesting that staff evaluate the feasibility of  undertaking a number of new housing policy initiatives in advance of the Comprehensive Plan Update:    A. Return with options to provide housing for moderate income government employees  including funding options and any barriers to creation of such housing; and  B. Return with a program for micro‐units Downtown, including decoupled parking, not  selling parking permits, lease restrictions with minimum impacts, how many units to  include in a pilot; and   C. Reevaluate the definition of mixed use retail and residential in select locations; and  D. Return with a plan for more bike storage Downtown; and  E. Return with options for ensuring existing housing is used for housing, not other uses or  unused.  F. Move housing sites from San Antonio to California Avenue and Downtown.    Housing issues are related to some of the Planning Department’s “Council Priority Projects” for 2016 as  discussed by the City Council at their retreat in late January.  At that time, the priority projects included  “Housing Element Implementation” as a project, and suggested outcomes of that project included a  number of the items above (i.e. micro units and moving sites from San Antonio in exchange for higher  densities elsewhere) because these are being considered  as part of the Comprehensive Plan Update  process.  The “Housing Element Implementation” project also included an outcome required by HCD as  May 26, 2016 DRAFT  Page 2  part of the City’s Housing Element (approved in November 2014) to enact incentives for small lot  consolidation.  Importantly, there was also a separate priority project to update the City’s affordable  housing impact fees, a project that is well underway.    The most recent list of Council Priority Projects includes the Council’s requests from March 21st and  reflects current staffing challenges. The planning department’s long range planning group has a  significant existing workload and is currently carrying two vacancies:  the advance planning manager and  a planner position, which together comprise 30% of the full time staff in this work group.  While  recruitment is underway, the department is trying to keep the group’s current work program intact with  an interim manager, one senior planner who is focused on our CDBG and housing programs, one land  use analyst, and one associate planner.   A half time consultant has recently been added to support the  Comp Plan Update project.     Together, the long range planning group is responsible for the Comp Plan Update, the City’s housing and  CDBG programs, other long‐range planning efforts (for example, retail preservation and the downtown  cap), maintaining the department’s GIS data layers, required reporting to regional, State, and federal  agencies, providing technical support and analysis for all current and long range planning efforts, and  providing development‐related data and mapping requests from many departments.      The department director, assistant director, administrative staff, consultants, hourly staff, and staff of  the City Attorney’s office and City Manager’s office support the work group to the extent feasible,  although these are the same people who are supporting other planning and transportation‐related  Council initiatives, reviewing and presenting staff reports, responding to email questions and colleagues  memos, etc., etc.  Also, department staff from other divisions (e.g. current planning, code enforcement,  transportation) cannot be redeployed to the long range planning group without significantly affecting  other department functions.    Discussion  In their motion on March 21, the Council requested staff evaluate the feasibility of undertaking a  number of housing (and bike rack) items in the near term (i.e. in advance of the Comp Plan Update).   The feasibility of the various components of the motion varies quite a bit, and is discussed further  below.      A. Return with options to provide housing for moderate income government employees including  funding options and any barriers to creation of such housing.  Eligibility under the City’s existing  housing programs is determined by total household income and size, and it would require  considerable effort to determine how many Palo Alto and PAUSD employees meet the current low  or moderate income eligibility criteria. Staff’s initial sense is that the majority of our employees  would not qualify under the existing criteria and that a completely new housing program with new  funding sources would need to be created.     This would be a significant work effort for planning and legal staff, involving a survey of employee  household income/size and housing needs, analysis of inclusionary zoning options, a legal analysis of  the nexus studies (in place and in progress) for affordable housing impact fees, exploration of best  practices for the provision of workforce housing, and development of options for public input and  Council consideration.  As evidenced by the flurry of media coverage after this suggestion was raised  in March, we can expect significant public interest in program development, which would itself take  time to absorb and consider.   May 26, 2016 DRAFT  Page 3    Based on past experience, the options that might rise to the top for consideration could include (a)  development of workforce housing on land owned by the City or school district; (b) creation of  incentives like density bonuses to stimulate housing affordable to members of the workforce; (c)  requiring some kind of workforce preferences for new market‐rate units requiring discretionary  approval; and (d) some kind of first time home buyers assistance.   There are undoubtedly other  options that staff could explore given the time and resources.  The level of environmental review  would depend on the options the Council wished to pursue.      We may need the services of outside legal counsel for this work effort, and may want to bring in a  consultant with housing policy expertise to support staff unless we can recruit an advanced planning  manager with that expertise.  Unless we can wait until the advance planning manager position is  filled, we would need to defer other projects or slow down the Comp Plan Update to complete this  work.     B. Return with a program for micro‐units Downtown, including decoupled parking, not selling  parking permits, lease restrictions with minimum impacts, how many units to include in a pilot.    This could also be a significant work effort, and at a minimum would involve development of  amendments to Chapter 18.18 (Downtown Commercial District) of the zoning ordinance, as well as  amendments to the resolution and administrative regulations governing the Downtown RPP  program.  Legal staff would need to work with Council Members who have financial interests in the  downtown area, and potentially with the FPPC, to determine whether those Members would need  to recuse themselves from participating.  Also, as explained previously, a recent Attorney General’s  opinion calls into question the ability to sell RPP permits to some residents and not to others.    Examination and adjustment of the Downtown Cap in Comprehensive Plan Program L‐8 is already on  the Planning Department’s work program, although staff vacancies have not allowed us to move  forward expeditiously.  We do have consultants engaged in determining the potential residential  capacities downtown and with a contract amendment and additional funding, we could ask the  consultants to support development of suggested zoning changes and attendant community  outreach.      While it may be possible to implement a pilot project on a single site downtown if there is interest  (and there may be) from a single property owner/developer, a broader program would ideally be  developed in conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan Update.  The level of environmental review  required for a broader program would depend on the specifics of the program elements the Council  wishes to pursue, and it would probably be most efficient to rely on the Comp Plan EIR or “tier”  from it with a program‐specific analysis.  To do this ahead of the Comp Plan Update (rather than  concurrent with or after) does not seem realistic unless it involves one specific development site as  indicated above.    C. Reevaluate the definition of mixed use retail and residential in select locations.  The Comp Plan  Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) is developing recommendations for policies and programs in the  Land Use & Community Design Element to address this issue.  If the Council is requesting  modifications to zoning provisions affecting the CN, CS, CD, and CC in advance of the Comp Plan  Update, this could be a significant work effort, involving development and analysis of options,  outreach to many, many property owners and other stakeholders, quantification of resulting  changes in intensity of use, environmental review, and ordinance preparation/adoption.  It would be  May 26, 2016 DRAFT  Page 4  possible to rely on the Comp Plan EIR for this effort, but that would dictate waiting for the EIR to be  completed and certified.      D. Return with a plan for more bike storage Downtown.  Our transportation group has a significant  number of projects moving forward, with limited ability to add more.  Nonetheless, we will be able  to develop and implement a plan for bicycle storage as part of the downtown mobility study  proposed for funding in the FY17 budget.      E. Return with options for ensuring existing housing is used for housing, not other uses or unused.   Council members are encouraged to report any residential properties they believe are being used  for non‐residential purposes to the City’s code enforcement group, and staff will investigate and  abate the violations.  We cannot take enforcement actions without specific addresses; addresses  can be provided to staff by using the Palo Alto 311 app or by emailing the planning director.      If the Council would like to develop and implement new regulations related to vacation rentals, the  recent experiences of other jurisdictions indicates this will be controversial and time consuming  both for the staff and the Council.   This work could potentially be done in conjunction with or in lieu  of the exploration of ADUs referred to the Planning and Transportation Commission, but until a new  Advance Planning Manager is hired, it is unlikely to move forward faster than the Comp Plan itself  (unless the Comp Plan were slowed down or the idea of analyzing a 5th and 6th scenarios was  dropped).      Regulating unused homes poses additional challenges and will require investigation of available  options and legal issues.  In general, the government cannot force a property owner to rent or live in  their home.  One Councilmember suggested imposing a fee on vacant homes to encourage their use.  Legally, the Council has the ability to impose fees related to agency’s costs (such as a registration  fee), but it is doubtful that a cost justified fee would incentivize use. Under Propositions 218 and 26,  any fee that does not have a nexus to an agency’s costs will likely be considered a tax, requiring  voter approval.    If these issues have become Council priorities, we would request other projects be deferred.         F. Move housing sites from San Antonio to California Avenue and Downtown.  This proposal cannot  feasibly be implemented in advance of the Comp Plan Update.  Removing housing sites from the  adopted housing element will require consultation with HCD and we will have to explain where we  have increased densities (or added new sites) to replace the units associated with these sites.      The Comp Plan Update can identify – and the Comp Plan EIR can analyze – areas where the Council  would like to increase densities and/or add sites, and staff recommends affirmatively making the  needed zoning changes before we remove housing sites from our inventory.  Otherwise, we risk de‐ certification of our housing element. Again this analysis can occur in the context of the 5th and 6th  scenarios as the Council directed in February.  Conclusion  These are all exciting issues that can be tackled in the several years, presuming budget and staff  resources are available.  However, it will be important to align and sequence this work with other efforts  like the Comp Plan Update to avoid one effort negatively affecting others.  Also, if resources remain  May 26, 2016 DRAFT  Page 5  somewhat constrained (e.g. staff vacancies), Council will need to prioritize its desired  projects/outcomes.