The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About0197.095City of Palo Alto 3 City l\tlanager's Summary Report TO: HONORABLE CITY COIlNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PlnDing aDd CommlllBity El!1Ilronment AGENDA DATE: April 3, 1995 CMR:197:9S SUBJECT: Comp",hnsive Pt ... Update -N.t ..... 1 EnvirollmeDt Draft Programs aDd Policies UQUEST The purpose of this report, lhe attached in-depth report. and C:MR:496:94 prepared for the Cooneil meeting of November 7. 1994, is to furward 10 Cooncil & sllIllIlll!Iy of comments OIl the Natural Environmen! Section of the Policy and Program Document of the Comprehensive PI!lII. The comments were made by the Planning Commisskm, other Boards and Commissions, CPAC and staff. The City ('.()UJ)cil should review this material and identify which goals, polN:' .... and programs should be in<;crporated into the D,,,lt N1lIUA1 Env\rorunent Element in Phase III of the update. Any additional direction OIl goats, policies and programs sboold also be provided. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended t!>.at tie City CQuncil rel-iew the proposed goals., policies, and programs 10 identify those that should bc included in the DnL.'i Natural Environment Element, or any issues no( in the document POLICY IMPLICATIONS The Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee (CPAC), Board and Commission and staff recommendations GOIItain numerous ClIy policy implication... The attached m depth report and the previoos City Manager report (CMR:496:94) provide information on policy changes. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The majorily of the proposed Nll!ural Environment Element goals, policies, and programs bw.1d OIl the goals, policies. and programs of the existing Comprehensive Pla,,_ PRe-IoU At the time the curren! Comprebenslvc Pian was adopted, lb. emphasis" was 00 finding ways 10 preserve lb. signifu:ant <JPCIl spaces in Ill. Baylands and F oothi11s. Be<au. .. these community-defining cpcn spac .. bave oow been appropriately zoned, and in some eases purchased and preserved, th<tt is an "I'P"<fUJrity 10 tum attention 10 o!ber areas. " New policy 1hemes include refinement of green spaces ",ithin 1he urbanized portions of the community. proIoction of Ill. remalning ""tun! ripariail corrldon. naturalization of some cbanneftzed creeh. and renewal of the urban forest. Polkies for bandling and <!earl-up of bazardous materials, non-point source pollution, and otiNtr enviroomental pa.ramelers are articulated for inclusion in !be Comprebenslve P!lm fcc !be first tL_. although public policy in Ibcse areas bas t-n oogoing fcc several years. Em«gency preparedness planning is strongly promoted. FISCAL IMPACT Adoption of i new Comprehensive Plan will result in potenti<lly signifi<:ant impacts 00 City expenartures and City revenues, The attacl;ed material identi 5es some fiscal impacts, and furtlter tis<:aI i..'Ilpacl analysis will be cood..,cted during preparation of the draft Plan" ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSJdE1IT.. An Environmental Impact ReporI ";11 be prepared 00 the draft Plan !bat emerges from !be public review and ",!>sequent goal, policy orHl program direction given by tlIe City Counci! PREPARED BY: Nancy Lytle, Chier Planning Official DEPARTMENTHEAD~1EW: ~;f:~~ KENNETH R. SCHREIBER "/ Director of Planning and Community Envirooment CHY MANAGER APPROVAL, Assistllnt City Manager l'q.1 0(' ". ,-.- . " ~ .'. o ..... y . -" ,>:~ City Manager's Report (In-Depth) SUBJECT: Natural EnTirolllllel!t SectIon or the Program 8IId Policy Documen! Cor die Draft Comprellenslve Plan JlF,COMMENDATIONS It is recommended !hat the City C<luncil review the proposed goals, policies, and programs 10 identif)' !hose thaI should be included in the draft N atunl Environment E1emcnl fOr the Comprehensive Plan {Jpdal¢ in Phase ill. Am, any additional goals, policies or progI2lIlS sbould also be added. BACKGRQl."ND Staff comments OIl the Natunl Envir('nn:eoI Section goals, policies, and programs ",e inc1uded in the ·Staff Comments' portion of the CPAC reoommendatioos (9/30194 staff repc<\ 10 Boards and Coounissioos). The November 1, 1994 City Manager', Report (CMR:496;94) forwards commenlS from tlIe City appointed Boards and Commissions and staff on the recommended goals. policies. and programs deveJoped by CP AC. Based on 1he November 1 coaunents, a few key issues lhat staff believes warrant comment are summarized. The Planning Commission also reconsidered their recommendation on riparian setbacks at !heir meeting of October 13, 1994. Thls report forwards their recoosidered action. POLley IMPUCATIONS The ma.iorilY of1he proposed Natural Environment Section goals. policies and programs build OIl those in 1he existing Comprehensive Plan. The recommended section dra, .... from two eximng Comprehensive po"", Elements. !he Open Space Element and !he Enviroomenl R~ Element. It is worth noting Ihat the Open Space Element of the current Comprehensive Plan is no! cont8ioed as a chapter in thc published Plan document. It is a ~ publication beta= it was beiog litigal¢d in the 1970s. when the Coolprebensive Plan was origIDally adopl¢d. It ta. • very different format and styk 1han !be professionally ed"rte<f chapter. 0( the remainder 0( the Comprebensive Plan. Having all Comprehensive Plan policies cocsotidal¢d into one document at the end 0( t!lis effort ",m be • significant administrative improvement. Some shift in policies from thc 1970s plan are apparent in the Natural Environment Section. Since !he <:OIIl1I1unity has now appropriately zoned. purchased andlor preserved signlficant qJeR space areas within Palo Alto's juriOOICtion. the CII1Ten! policies are DOl focused .. strongly on attaining those objectives. but instead 10 pmtecting the achievements. New focus is foond in five areas; ,--: • Urban forest restoration • Pro!ec-tion and reslOOl!ion 0( natural creeb • Wood 00rning stoves as pollution source • Noise Ordinance review • Geoteclmical hazards and emergency preparedness J)l$CIlSSIQN llrbim F<:mt Re!;1llra!ion New policies and programs are specified 10 streng1l>en the C~ 's ccmmitment 10 the renewal, pro!eCIioo and re-investmen! in the urban best. This issue was not so importanI: when the =m Comprehensive Plan was drafted, prOOably because !he urban forest wa\ in betlerheallh. CPAC directly referenced the Tree Task Force recommeodalioos for inoorpocatioc. into the Plan. and sIlIff and !he Planning Commission instead qualified the Ta.\k Force re-..ommeoda.1ioos by rocusing on incorporating the City Cooncil'. fula1 de<:isioos ()Il the Task. Foo:e Recommeodalioos during Phase ill. pmtrrtjQp and-Restoration of Natul1lr C"Jr!:ki Policies and programs for naruraI creek protection were recommended in the documelII. Creek setback polid.,. were originally dele!ed from the document in the Planning Commission recorr.mendations, but were reconsidered on 0cI0ber 13, 1994, and recommended with modification. The modified language recommended by staff and the Planning Commission in substitution for program 83, page 4, is as follows: "In areas aloog oaturaI creeks, an buildings, other structures, impervious surfaces, outdoor acIivlIy a.'US (ex<:ep! for passive 0< intermittent activities} and ornamenIl!1 landscaped areas sbould be separated a minimum of 100 feet from the lOp 0( bank. I. b. On tmdeveloped sites, the 100 foot setback would be observed; On sites where developmeOl aire<Kly exists within the setback, the existing development would be legal and OOf'oCOtlforming, and modifications 10 !bose site< coukI be handled through an exception process; and '"Ie" 01' c_ : . -.. -, -. Single-famtly property would be exempt from the 100 foot setWck requirement. with creek setbacks 10 be achieved by use of guidelines and fw1her study Ihraugh the City's participalioo in the Coordinated Regional Management Plan ~ and coordination with adj:>cenl cities. " Regarding me res1on6on of natural c=:ks. staff bas lDdicated in sidebar comments ;" the Program and Po!icies Dccumenlthe COSIlI of undoing the flood control work perfooned by I. ... Santa Clara Vaney Water District. The channelization flood cootrol work recently completed cost over $30 million. The impact of 'decharulelizilig" the creeks as they pass through parks would be eXlensive; and the work is nnJikeIy 10 be done. d"" 10 me need for IIIlIjor eanhworb 10 create necessary Cr05. se<:6ons I<J ronvey flood waters. Wood Rpm:pg StDv es PoIluIion generated by wood burning stoves is • sigrul'icantloca.l and Bay Area problem during the wiIller du" 10 carbon monoxide, dust and otber IOxic subsWlCes emitted. Staff rerommeDIIs reIention of the program addressing this concern (Program NE·S.Dl). Noise QrruW¥'& The Noise section of the doc\lIllelll needs more substanc<: added 10 the proposed policies and programs 1han i! c:urrentIy bas remaining .Ire, the Pianning Commission made thei.r reoommendations. Councii shoold evar,we the remaining policies, anJ staff sboold be directed 10 develop idditiooaI programs during ~ ill 10 address noise redu<:tioos. ("~Pilmigt1 H,zpn1c: m! ftT¥'iYJ,erg Presre4ness Recent wort by the Seismic Safety Commission in response 10 the Northridge earthquake bas included n:cOIIl!Ilellda.tions 10 Ioca.I jurisdiclioru; for more vigorous geologic and geotechnical review. Staff recommends the retention of programs requiring geotechnical reports and peer rev'..ewfor developme!l! and gracfmg in areas of high geotechnical bazards tl'rogIams NE·II.A2. A3 and A4). City staff are currently reviewing the emergency preparedness plan for the City, and staff may inctude "",.ral updated policies and programs from tbat effort in the Pbse ill documeDt. The comprehensive Plan. in order 10 meet State mandatory requiremenlS. will include reference 10 emergency route idenfil'ication, <flSaSter preparedness plans and other mea.--ures 10 reduce risk during disasters. ALIERNA]ll1;S Alternatives 10 many of !he goals, policies aM programs include deletion. subotantive mO<Iific:ation 0< a&!itions of ,,",w items. fISCAL IMPACI' AdopIion and implementation of !he new Comprehensive Plan will represenl shifts in City resource allocation and «>IDd bave very signlfic&l! impacts on City expenditures and likely impacts on City revenues. SWf bas identified cost ranges for some o(;be larger poIenIilIl e"lpCDditures, including \hose whieh an: li\ely 10 be implemented only willi. non .Iocalfunding soumos, but many policies and programs still have undefined fiscal impacts. FIlI1her fiscal impact ODalyses will be cooducted in Phase ill. ENVIRONMENTAL M§!kSSMFNf An Environmental Impact Report will be prepared OIl the dnlft PI.a.o. that emerges from the publ"lC nMeW and subsequent goals, policies and program dir~ given by !he City Council. SI'EPS FOlLOWING APPROVAL After Council identification of goals, polkies and programs, • draft Comprebensive Plan will be prepared. That documenI: will receive extensive public review. including nMew by each Board and Commission, prior 10 Council evaluation and action. ATIACBMENTS.IE.XHIBlTS None. COURTESY COPIES CPAC Architectural Review Board HistoriC llesoorces Board Human Rela!ioos ConurUssion Planning Commission Public Art Commission Utilily Adv'.sory Commission . '-.'