The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About0391.091... - .-"> .-- , " ---,--.. -".-~--.-.-~--- ~'''' , , , ' . '.,,~ :: . ", :',' HONORABLE cln COUllCIl Palo Alto, California Members of the Council: Report in Brief Tnfs is an informational report and na formal Council action is required. The report describes a proposed' expans'ior') at the Palo AHo Veterans Administration (VA) Hospital and staff actions in response to t~e proposal. ~rcund City staff was r~cently informed that the VA plans to constr:Jct a major new building and make ctner ~ubstantjal site changes at the existing VA hospital locat~d along Miranda Avenue in the Stanford Research Park. The main hospital building was extens;~ely damaged and has been parti~lly unoccupied s~nce the October 1989 earthquake. This building and several others totalling approximately 450,000 square feet are schedtJ1ed to be removed and replaced by a liew four-story, 80-foot-h;9h~ approximately 850,OOO-square:--foot building located in tne c~nter of the site. The new building will be a combination hospital, outpati ent cl1nic, medical offjce and medical research bu; lding_ The new building wou1d contain 2S~ hospita1 beds that wou1d replace the approximately 400 hed~ that were on the Site prior to the 1989 !artnquake. The remainder of the beds would remain at the VA's Menlo Park facility. The VA representatives indicated that they are expending lar~e sums in preparation of werldng drawings fer t"e project arid that t~ey hope tQ begin demolitioil work in August, with the start of constructfon later in 1991. The (ity Attorney's office has concluded that beca~se it is a fed~ral project en federal land, the project is not subject to local development ~egu1ation~. The project, however, must comply with the Federal Resource a~d Recovery Act {ReRA) and the National (nvironmental Policy Act (NEPA). At a minimum, such compli~nce means that the VA must co~ply with Palo Alto's regulations pertaining to solid and hazardous wastes and must engage in a process to iisess the project's enVironmental impacts on the surrounding area. The V4 has completed an Environmental Assessment a~d made a finding of No Significant Impact. The City Attorney's office beliewes that this finding is vulnereble t~ legal attack. because it was made ~ithout adequate local involvement and with relatively minimal consideration of envir'Onmental impacts, given the nature and size of the project. , . CMR:391 :91 p:\cmr\Yamed1 L",·ilIJ,rt ••• .. I l • i .: >, " ~,:~~ . ..:.~ .. ~ ~: -"jr. ,,:.\~.;~ >":'- "1>$'.0' ", ~~"f';r _____ _ -, o The project will require eiectrical. ~atcr~ sewage and garbage ser~ice, all of which t~e City may regulate in order to best promote the public heal tn, safety and welfare, notwitnstandiMg the gen~ral fede~al prfemption, Stoff ActiaM Ninimal information h~$ been provided to tne City for revie~. City staff has written the attached' July 25, 1991 letter to t~e VA, higniishting major CHy concerns ri1sed from the preliminary staff re..,ie .... of the projE:::t with requests for additional information. The letter also prc"'ide~ a more detailed destription of the project as un~erstood by staff. Staffis object1ves include obtaining a better understanding of t~e project, naving tile project go tJlrough a public re ... ;e",,' process in Palo Alto t ensuring that at! appropriate environmental re ... ie~ is conducted, ar,d ha",ing the project incorporate mitigations and other cha~ges as desired by tJle City Council. At this time, staff is focusing on trying to understand the p~oject and estabiishing a working relatioo3hip with the VA staff and tneir consultants. At som~ pOint, Congressional issistance may be appropriate to help resol ... e Pilo Alto's concerns. Staff will continue to inform the COIJrtcil, ArcJlitectural Review Board and Planning Commission of the project~s status. As soon as appropriate, this m;athr 'Will be placed on a public IT'tt!et-ing agenda. Respectfully submitte~. /;<j~ liLl()7i---/ /2fju(,[,~ , SARAH CHENEY S~\or Planner KENNETH R. SCHRFiBER Director of Planning and ; I Community fn ... ironment N FLEP'.ING ~'stant City Ma Attachment: tetter to Tom Carnpbel1 dated Jlugust 2, 1991 cc: ~rchitectural Review Board ,'-,. Planning Commission Stanford University (Andy Ooty. Diane Healey, Zera Murphy, Phl1 Wil1iamsJ United States Vetergns Administration ([ric R_ Carey, Harold H. Goode) C~R;391:91 p:\cmr\vamed1 c~~t··~ S/15/9! Page 2 : ... - -------~.--,-, o Citt, of Yolo )lIto c",_,"c·" .. '. The Honorable Tom Campbell Member, U.S. House of Representativ~s 313 Cannon House Office 8wilding Washington, D.C. 20515 D~ar Congressman Campbell: So" "J 0 Augu;t 1, 1991 Subject: Expansion of Pilo Alto Veterans Administration Medicdl Center The purpose of this 1~tter is to bring you up-ta-date O~ a proposed Veterans Administration (VA) project in Palo Aito and to i~dicate some initial concerns identified by our City staff. fj'e are \/ery supportive of the project~ since the VA Hospital provides an important commu~ity ser~ice to the Mid-peninsula. Having said that, 1 wa~t to express some seriuus conce~ns about the project and its potential effect on Palo Alto. As I understand He propc-sal. the VA pTans to construct a major neW' buiTding and make other substantial site changes at the existing VA hospital located a10ng Miranda Avenue in the Stanford Rese~rc~ Park. The main hospital bui1ding was extensive1y damaged and has been partially unoccupied since the October 1989 earthquake. This building and several others totalling appro:Cimately 450,000 square feet are sched\.Jled to be removed and replaced by a new four-story. eO-foot-high. approximately 8S0,OOO-square-foot building located in the center of the site_ T~e ne~ building will be a combination hosp1tal, outpatient clinic. medica1 office and medical research bui1ding. The new building would co~tai~ 250 hospital beds that would replace the app~oximately 400 beds that were Dr. the site prior to the 1989 earthquake. The remainder of the beds 'Would remain at the W,'s Menlo Parle facility. VA representatives nave indicated that t~ey are expending 1arge sums in preparation of working drawings for the project and that t~ey hope to begin demo1ition work in August, with the start of construction later in 1991. As noted in the attached July 26 letter~ ~e believe that th~s project raises critical public health. safety and e~vironmentil issues. The Federal Er.vironmental Assessment • ....,hich was done without contactirlg the City~ does not properly analyze the proposed project and, in our vie~. is not adequate. As a result) we are unable to deterffiine what tne probable affect of the project will be on Palo Alto. Our concp.rns are heigntened by the propOSEd 'I;s\.:\ .. ~.ltr an'i pm· ",'- o The Honorable Toro (ampbell August 2, 1591 Page Two commencement of construction this year and the fact that relatively large sums ,zre being expended by the VA tD prepare the construction-related working drawings that they have shared ~ith us. ~e are continuing OJT discussion with VA administrators, and J hope ~~ w411 be able to deal with these issues at this lev~l. I wi11 keep you advised of our. progress, so that you are knowledgeable in the e'l€nt we need to asl{ for your .assistance with the VA. Ma. ager Attachment: 7/26/91 Letter cc: Kenneth R~ Scnreiber~ Director. of Planr,i:ig and Community En\'ironmer.t Sarah tneney? Senior PTanner City Council h,.:\ .. -.cQ.ttr- • ", i I j ., , i r .. - o Depart~€nt of Planni~g and (o~~unitl fn¥ironment (415) 319-1354 250 Ha~llton Avenue P. O. 80x J01S0 -• ------! P~lo Alto, CA 943DJ-05E2 July 26, 1991 Mr. Eric R. Carey Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Facilities: (087D) 8}0 Vermont Avenue. N~ Washington, D.C. 20420 Subject: Construction of Clinical/Bed Tcwer Re;lacement Veterans .e.dmir:istration ~edical Center, Falo Alto, Caldorn!a and [nviron~ental ASsEssment (EA) The purpose of this Tetter is to provide y~u ~ith inltial rfictiGns to t~e proposed ccnstr~ctiDn activities ~t t~e Palo Alto V.terans Ad~injstr~tion Hospital site, and to the prOject EA, ""hicn is diited January 31, 1991, b~t was received by Palo Alto on july 1. 1991. SpecificCilly, t~is Tetter i,::!entifies areas of likely COncern that the City staff belie~e need to be addressed prier to t~e beginning of any construction activity. The lateness of your notice 10 us has prOvided us with insuffjcient time or opportunity for this project ta b2: reViewed by elected officials or the p12bLc, in accorc'arlcc-with Our-nor:r.al procedures. More detailed staff and ~~blic review of t~e project is necessary and may reslJlt in other concerns bei!"1g ic . .:.r.tified. O:.Jr understandil"Jg of the project is base,::! primarily en or..:r .June 21, 1991 discussion ind t~e subsequent receipt of the plans and the £~v~ronmentaT Assess;ne~t. In summary, He project includes: • Initial demolition of several bUildings (plannec for 1991) d~d subsequent demolition, after a t~ree-and-one·half year constructien project, of t~e eXisting main hospital building. Tot~l bUilding fleer arel to be removed is betWeen 400,000 and 450,000 square feet . • Construction of an 8IO,OOO-square-foot combinatio~ ~ospital, outp~tient clinic, medical office and rne~ic:al research b~·lJdin9. The new building would contain 250 hospital beds that would replace t~e approxi~ately 400 - o tled~ that .... ~re on the sHt> pdOT to the 15"89 eartliquak.e. of the beds would remail"l .a..t the VA's Menlo Park facility . • Construction of t~e ~e~ building would take three years. After construction ilnd a siJl m~nth ;nt've·~n period. the e:dsting rnilin hcspit"ll builc.ing 'll'ollld be demoHsned and the front of the s.ite red<?velnped ",itn parking and landscaping. The new SlO,OOO-square-foot bu;101ng ~Duld be located beh~nd the existing buildings. toward the center of the. site. Th~ bl.ii1<iing WOJJ'id' he 4 stories/Sa feet high plus a 20-foot deep baseme~t. The excavation area for the basement; s approxim~tel.Y 50:l feet square. kjJ·l Staff Re-\lie", The project description and this letter have been reviewed and discussed with representati~'es of potent,ialTy impactE-d City departr.;ents. The p1dns halVe re-cei .. ed a general re\l;ew by the Fh.nl1ing Dhisio:"1. The 1'1 ans hay!' not rec~i~ed detailed review by the Fire Department or Ins?ectiona1 S~rvice5 Division. The Envir~n~ental AssessmEnt hiS bee~ reviewed by the Planning D i \I i s i on. Based on our understanding of the project and our review of the prciect re1ated informat~on, the following concerns have been identified. lhesE ~re conc-crns that 'We wOIJ1d expe;:t to b~ s,j,jres';,e-d and' r~:;ohed prier to commencement of initial COr1structio'1 acti~ities. As noted befar{!, more dehiled staff review and the public review process may identify expand.::d cr addltlonal concerns. Tra.ffic/Circulation --TraffiC:'reia~ed issues are a. maj.:lr CDncern fer tile City of Palo Alto. The impart~nce of t~is issue also re1ates to recently en2ct~d California law (Le., Proposition]1) aDpro\lfd by tr.e voUrs in Ji,;ne. 1990} that hiS p1aced oew r~sPQnsib~lities ~n Cities to mit~9ite hea'/i1y-ccngEsted traffic conditions regar~less of the source of the trafflc. In 1959. the City of Pii10 Alto cOllclude,j an E):tensjve City",ide Lewd Usa a;"ld Tr;arLsportatior'J Study. This Study identified substantial traffic congestiol'l on Footh;n Expressway ilnd otr,el" Stanford Researc.h Park lcoUons and -al1ocate-d responsibility to fl.iture Park. deve.lopmen.t to ad,1ress thO::ie ;;rob1e.:r,s. S?H.ific improvements called for in t~e adopted (itj~ide Study thct directly relate to '(he VA site inciude lT1ajor modifications of the Foothil1/Hilhiew/~irat'Jda ar:d the FoothilljArastradero/Miranda intersections and construction of a nE~ it grade !ignalited intersection an foat~il1 (onnect'~g dire~t1y to the VA Hospital site_ The ne~ intersection on Foothill i5 certai~ to have a direct effect on the design of the main entr, drl\1eway tD the pro~osed VA facility. Given the size and 1QCit,on of the proposed project) ther~ is need for i traffic inilysis that addresses a.t Jeast the following items: L • ~ I ; ; j 1 I I I , ... o Mr. Eric R. (art,)' July 10, 1991 Page 3 (aJ Accurite description of existing and proposed uses, i.e., amount of sp~ce devoted to ~ffice, ser¥ice, hospital beds, medical cllnics, etc.; (b) Expected number and type of patients, visitors, employ~es ~nd staff; (e) (aJ (eJ (fJ (9 ) (h) ( . \ 1, (j J (kJ Estimated iraffjc gereration befor~ and after project, including av-erage dai1y traff:c and AN a.rd PM peak !raffic (the new project may create 16,000 cat1y trips or 2,000 PM peak hour trips, depending upon a more precise project descr1pt~on); Analysis of the project's direct impact on specified intersections and related improvement ~easures needed to reduce ~egative 1mpa~ts; Aralysis of the ~roject's i~pact on the Santa Clira County Congestion Matlagement Program (eMP) roadway s,)'stem; Description of existing/prcpo~ed Transportation Demand Manager;;ent (TOM) program to reduce single OCCl1pancy ve~dde trips: and encourage use of alternate transportation modes--bu$es, carpools, vanpools and bicyc1i!lg~ Existing and prDpo5~d bicycle parking and related facilities for both em~loyee5 and visitors; Existing and proposed ~arking numbers and locatiQns and anJljsis of their adequaci to serve identified population, adequacy of public transit service and transit amer.ities to ~he site (e.g. bus shelters); Adequacy of on·site circulation and access at site dri>'e· .. aJ; Plans for traffic control, if needed; and P~ans for stre~t imprQvements proposed including upgradi~g the Miranda Avenue frontage tc include suitable ~idening. and t'lf in~tallation of curb and gutt~r, Sidewalk and storm drainage improv~ments. Normal City development procedures require that suitable street impro .... ements be installed as part of the project. The project pJans as submitted do not • Hr. Eric R. Carey Ju1y 10, 1991 Page 4 include any off-site or on-site public i~pra~ement or utility plans. Standards for public right of way impro~ements are a~ailable from the Palo Alto Public Works Department. A mere s~ecjfic description of traffic related analysis requirements is available from the TransportatIon DIvision. Hazardous ~aterials/Risk: to Human Health ~azardous materials is of major concern. provided for Fi re Department Review: Storage, USE' and disposar of The fc,11cwir.g inforrration showTd be a. Hazardous materials business pla.n t~at will satisfy current lccal, state and federal repGrtin.g requ~ re;;,ents {SAR~ Title 110 b. Amount, type, method of storage, monltcring and disposal of ~azardous materjals and hazardou; ~aste (i~clud~ng radioactive and infectio~s wastes); c. Health and safety risks p~esentej bv the above a~d me~sures employed to minlr.;ize such nsk. (e.g" .• Risk. l'1anager.:eTit Prt'\iE:tltion Plan o~ federal e~ujvalentJ; d. Presence of contaminated sailor groundwater exi!ting en the site, and need fe.:-clean-u~ "ctio;:s. Ther~ are four dccu~ented sources of groundwater cc~tamin2ticn in the vicinity 0' the project sjte: 1) South· Fairchild Semicon~uctcr; 2) West -Sm~thkline Industries; 3) Nortn . l,,'aHins-J:;J"1r::SN1; e:nd 4) !'.'crUl' ... -E:st -TeTecyne Singer. All of these are now bel(lg investig.:t1:d to defi;:~ ne oO')'te;:t cf n,e ~lw~es and the irs o~rce s. £artn/S<!ismic: Hazards --The cancer-n ~ere is that tr:e site ha:s alreQ~'y experienced na'dng a sEnsitive i;rm,obile ~OyuJi!·"i:;Jn. (l-,ospital) in a b:.JiTdjng which sllst.1ined major eartl'l,:;uake c:'.a.m .. ;e. The 'le',", cuildlng shOUld be b' .. ilt to the highest standards tJ minimize selsmlc risk. Information is needed regarding: ~,!:::~~;.:~ .""~ . (aj Site soils report documenting soil co~dit:ons; (b) ~nalysjs of W~j t~e VA Hospital experienced extensiVE damage in the October 1989 eart~quake; (c) E!(posure tc seismic risk on site, PQrticuhrly for th;a hospital and portions of the site using nazardous materials; and . c~111k-i - • \ ! I 1 1 j I I • at i%.')_ w. Mr. Eric R. Carey July 10, 1991 Page 50 o (d) Measures to be employed to reduce seismic risK a~d relationship of tM€ mea.sures to cune;;t Californi,a Uniflirm Building (,:lde standards. Construction-R!Tated Impacts --In o~r discussion, you i~djcated t~e need to dispose of soil from an exca'oatio~ area ~easuri1'1g approxim"tely 51)0 feet by 500 feet and 20 f€et d~~p. Based on these co~ments, t~~re ;~pear t~ be on t~~ order of ]85,000 cubic yards af material to be ~auled from the site. In addition, Ue con!ttruction acti¥ities are likEly to hal/e a severe impact C'l1 existing parking. n,ese construction-related impacts nr:ed to be ilcdr€ssed, inCluding the proposed methlid and location of disposal of the exca~i1ted material and construction debris. It is expected that this material would nC't be disposed of in the Palo Alto Landfill. AestheticS" --\lisual impacts w~lT b-e a concern, particu1.arly to ne-arby re.sidents. Initi~l re~iew indicates that the butlding will be located in the center of the site with subst~ntial setbacks, and impacts may not be _ substantial. The building appears stark and boxy in the el€Vation draw';,ngs but looks much better in the zxonometric drawi~gs. A ¥isual analysis should be undertaken tnat docuq1,ents i~';lacts from a variety of '::lff-site lontior;s. There will be a strong interest in the b~ilding de5ign and materials, a~d ~e would hope t~at the City ca~ have constructive input, especially into decisions lin exterlor materials, colors, window treatment, and lighttng. The Gity has adopted guidelines for drought-t~lEiant landscaping (see AttacJiI';'",ent II) which Stanford University and its 1esseEs t~;"'e be~n tISillg fOi ne~ de~eTopment i~ the Research Park. The improved entrance concept whi(~ yo~ propase appears to be very good, but a )''!ore nati.,! foot.hills la:1d:'COope approach should be used instead of the fcr~al ;ardens. Noise --Impacts of noise on neig~boring busin~sses and reside~ces d~ri~g the construction periq,:j is a cor.cern. The City cf Palo A\to has c:dopted c. Noise Ordjnance ~hich r~g~lates constr~ction ~cjse {see Attach~ent IIIJ. Utilities/Public Ser~ices --The City cf Palo AHo provides all utiTHy services to the site. The City's Utiliti~s depart~ent is re.sponsible for 'Water. gas, ,and e1ectric sen ice. plus the sanita~y sewer lines. H,e Public WcrKs Department is r-esponsjble for the "-'ater Quality Treatment PT.!.nt, storm ~ater {we na¥e a storm ~ater utiltty) dnd refuse collection and disposal. ~ou will need to do~ument any proposed increase above current ~tj1ity usage, and work with City utilities persqnnel on the provision to ensure that you meet i~creased demand. Special areas of concern may include water usage, i~dustrial wastewiter dlsposal, the capacity of the water. gas and waste~ater c~l1ection sys.tems, el'ect,.ic power dema,.,ds, and refuse disposal. ,,,::, .. p .... .-_"'''''' .. ..,.L '"" .. ' .:: 8' . , , ",:-.~~ :-r: ~.;~':::";~~i ~:'~' - ,--_ ..... ",-- '~. ~. if'4~"· ,--. r i , . :,>~~:-~~ -.-.-;,.....:..,-' 'or ;.'~';,. - ~ilt - ~r. [ric R. Ca~ey July )0, BSI Pogo 6 The '\lA Hospital's (ompl i ar,ce with imh!Strtal w.aste'Nater requ; rements has ~een 'I prcbh.m in the. itM'lediate pa!"L The proj€ct must e.nSlJre proper segregat10n. minimizaticn and monitoring of indu~trial w~stewaters. All Palo Alto utility standards snou1d be complied with, and a11 nf,;'" substructures should be apprvved by CPA underground inspectDrs. The City IJf Palo A1t(l has initiated a program fer-use of reclaimed water for demolition, construction and some landscapir,g. The City ... ,11 requ'fre a COffilili tment to use n:.c1 a ~med 'lI'ater. -wr,en iro'J(,. i1 ab 1 i:, fr~m the City'.s pr'o?osed reclaimed wate~ distributio~ sY$tem on the remaining go1f course~ and if practical, for toilets and other applicable wses insice the p~o~osed building_ The recently enacted California Integr~ted Waste Ma"~genent Act of 1989, (AB 939) mandates that all California cities and co~~ties recycle 25 percent of t.heir W<ist~ stream by 1995 and .50 p'E'rcent b)' 2000. The City of Palo Alto 1S encou1'"aging all businesses. SCr.OOls, h{;;s';lita~s. and resi,jents to i[)creas~ recycling efforts_ The ~A Hospital is one of t~e largest generators of waste in Palo AHo) yet currently ~as ;'0 recycling programs. The City of PaiD AH" reqlJests that adequate facilities for rE'c),cling act1'iities be l?'1cl\Jd£oo i;'1 the Medical Center expansion and that Hedic~l Center staff work with City of Palo Al to Recyc1 ing Program staff to imp: ement ccmpr2herlsive ree]c1 ing prcgrams_ Similar coopentl'o'e efforts are already in ~lace at the Palo P;,lto ~edica1 Clinic and th~ Stanford Uni~efsity Hospital, ~radi-f1g and Drainage --The VA drainage and grading imprOVe'7l2!'lts ...... '11 ir.:pact the \oIorlL c\Jri"ently beirrg desigf,ed by SCinta Clara )'al1l":), ,,'atH Dhtritt, (SCVWD). SCVWD is currently 9reparing ~etail pla~s for a major f1001 contro1 project in the area of the for~er SP right of way, immfdi~teTy to th~ east of the VA site. The project ~1'1 ~j~ert storm flows from Barren Cre2k and Matader(l Creek into a lJery hrge 1Ie-", dh'Hsion pi.pelir:.e_ 1his p~peli:1e ""in route storm flows into an existing concre!e lined cha~nel dDw~5tream of El Camino. It ~ill be important to cocrdinate project Grai~age sorutions with the SeWQ. Drainage couid become a signifjcant to~cern if th.ere is potential to intercept groundwater (particularly contaminated groundwater) or if the increased drainage could adversely impact the creek or area storm drain lir,es_ The site does have portions within two flood lones (Matad.ero Creek Zone A ~it~ flood level undefined, and sout~east corner in Zone AE with bise flood elev~tfon to 89 feet). The project 'ttIill f1eed to (.ompl1 ... itt-. F'eden1 (I'M~rgenc:y Managemer,t Agency requirements ",ith regard to fioad zonE'S_ The following information should be provided for City revie~~ (a) The i!.rncunt of excaYation and gra.cin.g proposed as a result of the project; • • I l , i \ \ \ I , • 1- • -----~-.; o Mr. [ric R. Carey July ]0, ]99] Page 7 (b) (e) The potential for the project ta intercept grau~dwate~; Storm driinage plans a~d calculations, in~luding topasraphical data, documenting increased drainag€ to Mata~ero Creek; and Cd) Proposed in<:reasr; in ilTlperm-eabTe coverage:. (Please note: ali Pa.l0 Alto corrrnercia1 and m'..Jl tipiE-fa'l1ily residential projects are assessed a storm drij~age fee based on the a~ount of imperiious coven,ge on site, per"" the provisia.r1s of the Cfty's Storm Drain Enterprise Utility. An incre~se in impermeable (overage could increase the required fee). Animal Ufe/Cu1tural Resources --Tne~€ areas are Ued together because th,ey are both a concern in areii bordering Matad-ero Creek, including dlsrupticn of Indi~n remalns, wildlife habitat or riparian ~egetat~o~_ It dOES not appear that the project will affect the creekside areas, so this should nat be ~ major problem_ However. you need to check with Stanford to see if the ~r~a may cO\l~r a. potential arc~as-olo5'Y site_ nere <irE ntl~.e.r'Jus other sHes 'With IndIan artifacts in the immediate vicinity. We nave completed <:In initial review of the f?ceral E.rwircn.c:entaJ P,SS~S.E.7le~t dated January 31. 1991 and forwarded to ws by James ~c1tschIJ'te_ Tn su;;-,,7Iary, th,s ~n\lironmental document is totally i~adeGuate_ The m~jor problem may be that the document does not a~dress the project that JOu have d~scrjbed to th~ (lty_ The docu~ent describes a project titJ~d ~Re;J1.;c-e Clinical/Bed To\\'er for Seismic Corrections_" There appears to be no recognjtic1 that the project will result in approximately <Sl,OOD additional squ~re feet of floor a~ea to tnat existing and occupied pri~r to the 198; earthquake, and th~t the final project will have fewer hospital beds than i~ ]989 and substantial incrEas?s jn nen-hospital bed floor area .and site. uSES_ Specific prGolems with the en'o'irQnITTental do<:ur.:.ent lnclu·1e: Page 5 Page e Page a Page 9 Page 10 p:'.II;'\If~.lv Air Quality No reference to traffic_ GeolcgJ and Soiis --No reference to seismiC issues. Hydrology and Irrater Quality --No refere~ce to toxic mater-}al issues. land Use --Conrnents do not ref1ect the projecL Controversy·related comments na',le no basis for support. . .. Mr. [ric R. C~rey July 10, 1991 Page B Page 11 -Resident Fopulation --CO.'mlent (-staff may incre.a.se slightl,y'''J does not reflect the project. Pa.ge 11 - Page 12 Page 12 Solid Waste --Corr~ents do Mt quantify the volumE of m~t€ria1 to ~e demolished and remo ... ed and reliiited truck trips. Com.'r1ents also do not address the amount cf soil to be removed and relat~d truck trips. The is~we of increased solid ~aste g~nEration and recycling progra~s also needs to be addressed. Transportation .-NJ refer~nce to traffic increases. Utilitl~s .. Comme~ts appear to have no connection with Pilo Aite information. (Note also tnat the City is nat c]ted 35 a source IJrL page 14, even Hough the City is resp.onsible for all utility services.) City staff also concurs with the content of the attached July II, ]991 letter from Jacqueline \(),land, Chlef of the Office of Federal Acthrlties fDr U.S. EPA Region IX to Harold Goode, We!t~rn Area Project ~anag€r for the Department of Ve-tero.ns Affalrs {Mt~dment I}~ Conc::.l usio)l The City of Pilo Alto is eager to coaper.ati'olely .. ork \tIiith the Veterans Admin-istration on review of the propo!.ed project. It is samC'\Io'hat disconcerting to realize the amount of work thdt has gone into this: project prior to contacting the City. We desjre to not und'Jly delay the project, but there are-concerns that need to be addressed in order for the City to be c1Jmfortabl! w-ith the project, including the provision of essential City utility ind other serwices to the site. City staff would appreciate an opportunity to meet \tIiitk you and ~t~er project team members to learn more-about the project. re301ve to the ext~~t possible cur concerns, a~d deCide on the public rewiew process that this project wi11 receive. A significa~t element of the public re~iew process will be the envlr~nmenta1 review~ Unless substantiil mitigations are incorporated into the project, it is difficult for the City to understand ho~ i NEPA-based Environmental Impact Statement can be avoided. Clearly this is a~ issue that deserves substantial discussion. Senior Planner Sarah Cheney has been appointed coordinator of City work related to your project. Ms. Che~ey is a member of the Planning Division and has extensi¥e exper1ence ~ith City revie~ procedures and la~d use and --:--'1 .~ l..- ;,." • .~ -o Mr. Eric R. Carey July 10. 1991 Page 9 development policies. Represe~tatjyes from relevant work ~itn Ms. Cheney and you and your project team. .t (415) 329-2149. (tty departments will Ms. Cheney can be reached J ~i'l remaIn closely connected to t~e analysis and review of this project. Please feel free to tontact me at a~y ti~e at (415) 329-2354. KR5:jm Sincerely. ¥",,' £i::-R S J 1.V--4~ KENNETH R. SCHPfTBER Director of PTanninq and Co~m\.Jni ty F.r.\liron~,el1t Attachments: I. H. !II. EPA letter landsc~pe Guidelines NQise OrCinajice c:c: Wi11iam Zaner, City Manager Sarah Chen€:y. Senior ?lanr.er _ Sue Case, Senior Assisti!.nt City Attorney J~mes HoTtschulte, Department of VeteT~ns Affairs Harold Gaode, Department of Veten.ns Affairs Ja(queline ~yland, U.S. Environmental Prote~tia~ As~ncy Stanford Unh'ersity I,Ancy Dot.Ii, D~a~e He-a1E:J. Zera Hur;:hy, Pr.il 'liil Ti ams J Palo Alto City Dep .. rt~,erlts {Fire, Pollee, Public '-,ar~s, Utilities a:nd P1iinning and Cvrr~"T.ur:lty Envircnment) -------~. -.... , • , •