RESOLUTION NO. CC 2022-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO
CERTIFYING A FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (FEIR),
ADOPTING THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
(MMRP), ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
AND DIRECTING THE FILING A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION FOR A MIXED-USE PROJECT AT 2001 MANHATTAN AVENUE
(WOODLAND PARK EUCLID IMPROVEMENTS).
WHEREAS, the application for General Plan Amendment (GP19-001) and Development Code and Zoning Map amendments (ZC19-002), Design Review Permit (DR 19-028), Conditional Use Permit (CUP22-003), Tentative Parcel Map (TTM19-001), and Development Agreement submitted by Woodland Park Communities/Sand Hill Property Company (“Sand Hill”) pertains to an approximately 3.92-acre project site generally located at 2001 Manhattan Avenue, East Palo Alto, CA; and WHEREAS, Sand Hill proposes construction of a mixed-use residential project containing approximately 605 residential units within three buildings ranging in height from 5 to 13 stories with approximately 605 parking spaces in a structured garage and approximately 2,500 square feet of community function space and 2,215 square feet of neighborhood-serving retail space; and
WHEREAS, on July 1, 2021, the City issued a Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) and received fifteen comment letters during the extended 75-day public comment period which ended on September 15, 2021; and WHEREAS, a Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) has been prepared in accordance with Section 15132 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and the City Council reviewed the FEIR and the comments received during the public review period; and
WHEREAS, in accord with Section 15090 of the CEQA Guidelines, the FEIR has been presented to the City Council and the document reflects the City’s, as lead agency, independent judgment and analysis; and
WHEREAS, a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, and the statement of overriding considerations is supported by substantial evidence in the record; and WHEREAS, on July 25, 2022, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the General Plan and Development Code Amendments, Zoning Map Amendments, Design Review and Conditional Use Permits, Tentative Parcel Map, Development Agreement, and Environmental Impact Report (EIR), and other project entitlements (“Project”) and recommended the City Council approve the project by Resolution #____;
WHEREAS, on September 6, 2022, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project and continued the public hearing to September 20, 2022;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE EAST PALO
ALTO CITY COUNCIL hereby:
1. Certifies that the Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2020040270) on file with the City Clerk has been done in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA);
2. Adopts a Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Plan (Attachment A) pursuant to Public Resources Code 21000 and the CEQAGuidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000);
3. Adopts a Statement of Overriding Considerations (Attachment B);
4. Directs the Community and Economic Development Director to File a Notice of Determination within five working days of adoption pursuant to Section15075 of the CEQA Guidelines; and
ADOPTED on this _______ day of ________ 2022, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
SIGNED:
Ruben Abrica, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
James Colin
City Clerk
Valerie J. Armento
Interim City Attorney
ATTACHMENT A: MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-1
June 2022
4 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
4.1 Public Resources Code
When approving projects with Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs) that identify significant impacts, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires public agencies to adopt monitoring and reporting programs or conditions of project approval to mitigate or avoid the identified significant effects (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(1)). A public agency adopting measures to mitigate or avoid the significant impacts of a proposed project is required to ensure that the measures are fully enforceable, through permit conditions, agreements, or other means (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(b)). The program must be designed to ensure project compliance with mitigation measures during project implementation.
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) is organized in a table format (see Table 4-1: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project, keyed to each significant impact and each EIR mitigation measure. Only mitigation measures adopted to address significant impacts are included in this program. Each mitigation measure is set out in full, followed by a tabular summary of monitoring requirements. The column headings in the tables are defined as follows:
▪ Mitigation Measures: This column presents the mitigation measure identified in the EIR. ▪ Monitoring/Reporting Responsibility: This column contains an assignment of responsibility for the monitoring and reporting tasks.
▪ Timing of Implementation: This column refers to when the measure is required to be implemented.
▪ City Staff/Notes: This column will be used by the lead agency to document the person who verified the implementation of the mitigation measure and the date on which this verification occurred.
4.2 Enforcement
If the project is approved, the MMRP for the development would be incorporated as a condition of such approval. Therefore, all mitigation measures for significant impacts must be carried out to fulfill the requirements of approval. A number of the mitigation measures would be implemented during the course of the development review process. These measures would be checked on plans, in reports, and in the field prior to construction. Most of the remaining mitigation measures would be implemented during the construction, or project implementation phase.
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-2
June 2022
Table 4-1: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Impact
Number Mitigation Measure
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing of Implementation
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
Aesthetics
AES-2 MM AES-2.1 Construction Screening
To minimize and soften the visual effect as
seen from visitors and nearby residents,
the project proponent shall incorporate
construction fencing or screening around
the perimeter of the site. The screening
material shall be of sufficient height to
mask ground-level activities within and be
designed with graphics, murals, historic
references, or other design features to
blend as much as possible with the
neighborhood surroundings while
communicating the future uses at the site.
Screening shall remain in place during
demolition of existing structures, site
preparation and new building construction.
Screening shall not be necessary during the
final stages of construction when
architectural coatings, detailing and
landscaping are applied. The plan for
screening concept and design shall be
submitted for approval to the City of East
Community and
Economic
Development
Department
Plan for screening to be submitted
prior to the issuance of any building
or grading permits.
Measure to remain in place until
final stages of construction.
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-3
June 2022
Impact
Number Mitigation Measure
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing of Implementation
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
Palo Alto prior to issuance of any building
and grading permits.
AES-2 MM AES-2.2 Water Tank Screening
During construction, the applicant shall
provide construction screening of the
water tank site to soften visual effects of
construction. In the final phase of tank
construction, the applicant shall landscape
the perimeter of the water tank site at 375
Donohoe with a combination of fencing
and vegetation to soften and screen the
appearance of the water tank and related
improvements. Plant selection shall include
native, taller species or trees to provide a
visually appealing screen as viewed from
the roadway and surrounding land uses.
Landscaping and screening shall not
conflict with water tank access or
operations. Landscaping plans shall be
submitted to the City for review and
approval with final improvement plans.
Community and
Economic
Development
Department
Applicant to maintain screening
around the perimeter of the water
tank site throughout construction
period (e.g. demolition, site
preparation, and new building
construction).
Landscaping plans shall be submitted
to the City for review and approval
with final improvement plans.
Applicant to landscape the
perimeter of the water tank site with
fencing vegetation in the final phase.
AES-3 MM AES-3.1 Glare Reduction Community and
Economic
Applicant to incorporate AR glass
products and surfaces to minimize
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-4
June 2022
Impact
Number Mitigation Measure
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing of Implementation
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
As part of final improvement plans, the
project shall incorporate anti-reflective
(AR) glass products and surfaces selected
specifically to minimize reflective glare.
Such materials can vary but typically
consist of matte or patterned finishes that
serve to both reduce reflective glare and
reduce bird strike.
Development
Department
glare as part of final improvement
plans.
Air Quality
AQ-2 SC AQ-2.1 BAAQMD Basic Construction
Measures
BAAQMD Basic Construction Measures.
Prior to any grading activities, the applicant
shall prepare and implement a
Construction Management Plan that
includes the BAAQMD Basic Construction
Mitigation Measures to minimize
construction-related emissions. This shall
plan shall first be reviewed and approved
by the Director of Public Works/City
Engineer. The BAAQMD Basic Construction
Mitigation Measures are:
Director of Public
Works/City
Engineer;
Construction
contractor
Prior to and during construction.
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-5
June 2022
Impact
Number Mitigation Measure
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing of Implementation
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
• All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas,
staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and
unpaved access roads) shall be watered
two times per day.
• All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or
other loose material off-site shall be
covered.
• All visible mud or dirt track-out onto
adjacent public roads shall be removed
using wet power vacuum street sweepers
at least once per day. The use of dry power
sweeping is prohibited.
• All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall
be limited to 15 mph.
• All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to
be paved shall be completed as soon as
possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon
as possible after grading unless seeding or
soil binders are used.
• Idling times shall be minimized either by
shutting equipment off when not in use or
reducing the maximum idling time to 5
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-6
June 2022
Impact
Number Mitigation Measure
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing of Implementation
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
minutes (as required by the California
airborne toxics control measure Title 13,
Section 2485 of California Code of
Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be
provided for construction workers at all
access points.
• All construction equipment shall be
maintained and properly tuned in
accordance with manufacturer’s
specifications. All equipment shall be
checked by a certified mechanic and
determined to be running in proper
condition prior to operation.
• Post a publicly visible sign with the
telephone number and person to contact
at the Lead Agency regarding dust
complaints. This person shall respond and
take corrective action within 48 hours. The
Air District’s phone number shall also be
visible to ensure compliance with
applicable regulations.
AQ-3 MM AQ-3.1 Off-Road Diesel-Powered
Construction Equipment
Community and
Economic
Development
Construction operations plan to be
submitted and equipment
specifications to be confirmed prior
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-7
June 2022
Impact
Number Mitigation Measure
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing of Implementation
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
All mobile diesel-powered off-road
equipment operating on-site for more than
two days and larger than 50 horsepower
shall, at a minimum, meet U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
particulate matter emissions standards for
Tier 4 engines or equivalent. Prior to the
issuance of any demolition permits, the
project applicant shall submit a
construction operations plan to the
Planner/Project Manager of the Planning
Division of the Department Community and
Economic Development, which includes
specifications of the equipment to be used
during construction and confirmation this
requirement is met. Such equipment could
include concrete/industrial saws, graders,
scrapers, rollers, cranes, forklifts, generator
sets, and air compressors.
The construction contractor may use other
measures to minimize construction period
Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) emissions
to reduce the estimated cancer risk below
the thresholds. The use of equipment that
includes CARB-certified Level 4 Diesel
Particulate Filters or alternatively-fueled
Department;
Construction
Contractor
to the issuance of any demolition
permits.
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-8
June 2022
Impact
Number Mitigation Measure
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing of Implementation
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
equipment (i.e., non-diesel), added exhaust
devices, or a combination of these
measures could meet this requirement. If
any of these alternative measures are
proposed, the construction operations
plans must include specifications of the
equipment to be used during construction
prior to the issuance of any demolition
permits. If any of these alternative
measures are proposed, the plan shall be
accompanied by a letter signed by a
qualified air quality specialist, verifying the
equipment included in the plan meets the
standards set forth in this mitigation
measure.
Biological Resources
BIO-1 MM BIO-1.1 Preconstruction Bird Surveys
The applicant shall schedule all on-site tree
removal, demolition and grading to occur
outside of the nesting and breeding season
(February 1 through September 1) of any
given year to avoid nest disturbance. If this
schedule is not practical or feasible, the
applicant shall hire a qualified biologist to
Project
Applicant;
Qualified
Biologist
Applicant to schedule on-site tree
removal, demolition, and grading to
occur outside of the nesting and
breeding season (February 1 through
September 1) to avoid nest
disturbance.
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-9
June 2022
Impact
Number Mitigation Measure
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing of Implementation
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
conduct preconstruction nesting bird
surveys of the site plus a 100-foot
perimeter around the site, no more than
seven days prior to removal of trees and
grading. If nesting birds are observed, the
biologist will establish a buffer zone where
no tree removal or grading will occur until
the biologist confirms that all chicks have
fledged and are no longer reliant on the
nest. The buffer zone may vary from 50 to
250 feet, depending upon the species of
bird and exposure of the nest site.
If surveys are required, results shall
be submitted to Community and
Economic Development Department
prior to commencement of site
work/tree removal.
Cultural Resources
CR-2 MM CR-2.1 Inadvertent Discovery of
Archaeological Resources
In the event the buried, or previously
unrecognized archaeological deposits or
resources are encountered during ground
disturbing activities, work shall be
temporarily halted within a 50-foot radius
of the discovered materials and workers
should avoid altering the materials and
their context until a qualified professional
Archaeologist has evaluated the situation
Construction
Contractor;
Qualified
Archaeologist
During ground disturbing activities.
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-10 June 2022
Impact
Number Mitigation Measure
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing of Implementation
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
and provided appropriate
recommendations. Project personnel shall
not collect cultural resources. Construction
and potential impacts to the area(s) within
a radius determined by the archaeologist
shall not recommence until the assessment
is complete.
If any tribal cultural resources are found,
the project applicant and/or its contractor
shall cease all work within 50 feet of the
discovery and immediately notify the City
of East Palo Alto Planning Division.
Potentially significant Native American
resources consist of but are not limited to
chert or obsidian flakes, projectile points,
mortars, and pestles; and dark friable soil
containing shell and bone dietary debris,
heat-affected rock, or human burials. The
tribal monitor(s) will contact the tribal
representative(s) and in consultation with
the City and an archeologist evaluate the
finds. Appropriate mitigation measures for
the inadvertently discovered tribal cultural
resource shall be at the direction of tribal
leadership.
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-11 June 2022
Impact
Number Mitigation Measure
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing of Implementation
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
The City and tribal representative(s) shall
consider the mitigation recommendations
and agree on implementation of the
measure(s) that are feasible and
appropriate. Such measures may include
reburial of any ancestral remains,
avoidance, preservation in place,
excavation, documentation, or other
appropriate measures.
CR-2 MM CR-2.2 Inadvertent Discovery of
Human Remains
In the event that human remains (or
remains that may be human) are
discovered at the project site, Public
Resource Code Section 5097.98 must be
followed. All grading or earthmoving
activities shall immediately stop within a
50-foot radius of the find. The project
proponent shall then inform the San Mateo
County Coroner and the City of East Palo
Alto immediately, and the Coroner shall be
permitted to examine the remains as
required by California Health and Safety
Code Section 7050.5(b).
Community and
Economic
Development
Department; San
Mateo County
Coroner
During ground disturbing activities.
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-12 June 2022
Impact
Number Mitigation Measure
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing of Implementation
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
Section 7050.5 requires that excavation be
stopped in the vicinity of discovered human
remains until the Coroner can determine
whether the remains are those of a Native
American. If human remains are
determined as those of Native American
origin, the applicant shall comply with the
state relating to the disposition of Native
American burials that fall within the
jurisdiction of the NAHC (Public Resource
Code [PRC] § 5097). The Coroner shall
contact the NAHC to determine the most
likely descendant(s) (MLD). The MLD shall
complete his or her inspection and make
recommendations or preferences for
treatment within 48 hours of being granted
access to the site. The MLD will determine
the most appropriate means of treating the
human remains associated grave artifacts,
and shall oversee the disposition of the
remains.
In the event the NAHC is unable to identify
an MLD or the MLD fails to make a
recommendation within 48 hours after
being granted access to the site, the
landowner or his/her authorized
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-13 June 2022
Impact
Number Mitigation Measure
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing of Implementation
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
representative shall rebury the Native
American human remains and associated
grave goods with appropriate dignity within
the project area in a location not subject to
further subsurface disturbance.
Geology & Soils
GEO-5 MM GEO-5.1 Final Geotechnical
Evaluation
A construction level geotechnical
evaluation shall be required for the project.
The project shall be required to adhere to
and incorporate all standards and
recommended engineering measures to
mitigate for liquefaction, expansive soils
and other local soil constraints. The final
geotechnical evaluation will be provided to
the City for review and approval prior to
the issuance of building permits.
Community and
Economic
Development
Department
Prior to the issuance of building
permits.
GEO-6 MM GEO-6.1 Inadvertent Discovery of
Paleontological Resources
In the event that fossils or fossil-bearing
deposits are discovered during
Qualified
Paleontologist
During ground disturbing activities.
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-14 June 2022
Impact
Number Mitigation Measure
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing of Implementation
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
construction activities, work shall be
temporarily halted with a 50-foot radius of
the discovered materials and workers
should avoid altering the materials and
their context until a qualified
paleontologist has evaluated the situation
and provided appropriate
recommendations. Construction and
potential impacts to the area(s) within a
radius determined by the paleontologist
shall not recommence until the assessment
is complete.
If it is determined that the proposed
development could damage unique
paleontological resources, mitigation shall
be implemented in accordance with Public
Resources Code Section 21083.2 and
Section 15126.4 of the CEQA Guidelines.
Possible mitigation under Public Resources
Code Section 21083.2 requires that
reasonable efforts be made for resources
to be preserved in place or left
undisturbed. If preservation in place is not
feasible, the applicant shall mitigate
significant effects. Excavation as mitigation
shall be limited to those parts of resources
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-15 June 2022
Impact
Number Mitigation Measure
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing of Implementation
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
that would be damaged or destroyed by a
project. Possible mitigation under CEQA
emphasizes preservation-in-place
measures, including planning construction
avoid paleontological sites, incorporating
sites into parks and other open spaces,
covering sites with stable soil, and deeding
the site into a permanent conservation
easement. Under CEQA Guidelines, when
preservation in place is not feasible, data
recovery through excavation shall be
conducted with a data recovery plan in
place.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
GHG-1 MM GHG-1.1 Transportation Demand
Management Plan
Prior to approval of project entitlements
for future residential uses, the project
applicant shall prepare qualifying Commute
Trip Reduction (CTR)/Transportation
Demand Management (TDM) plan to
reduce mobile GHG emissions for all uses.
The TDM plan shall be approved by the City
of East Palo Alto and any physical features
Community and
Economic
Development
Department
Prior to the approval of project
entitlements.
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-16 June 2022
Impact
Number Mitigation Measure
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing of Implementation
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
resulting from the plan shall be shown in
final improvement plans. The TDM plan
shall discourage single-occupancy vehicle
trips and encourage alternative modes of
transportation such as carpooling, taking
transit, walking, and biking. The following
measures or equally effective measures
shall be incorporated into the TDM plan.
• The project applicant shall consult
with the local transit service provider
on the need to provide infrastructure
to connect the project with transit
services. Evidence of compliance with
this requirement may include
correspondence from the local transit
provider(s) regarding the potential
need for installing bus turnouts,
shelters or bus stops at the site.
• The CTR/TDM plan for the project
shall include, but not be limited to the
following potential measures: ridematching assistance, preferential carpool parking, flexible work
schedules for carpools, half-time
transportation coordinators, providing
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-17 June 2022
Impact
Number Mitigation Measure
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing of Implementation
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
a web site or message board for
coordinating rides, designating
adequate passenger loading and
unloading and waiting areas for ridesharing vehicles, and including bicycle end of trip facilities. This list may be
updated as new methods become
available. Verification of this measure
shall occur prior to building permit
issuance for the commercial uses.
Hazards & Hazardous Materials
HAZ-1 MM HAZ-1.1 Asbestos Operation and
Management Plan
Prior to demolition and removal of material
from the site, the project applicant shall
implement the recommendations of the
2014 Asbestos O&M Plan for work
involving asbestos-containing material.
These measures include asbestos training
and specific work procedures for
employees managing asbestos
contaminated materials, notification
procedures for building owners and
occupants, asbestos clean-up and
Project
Applicant; City
Building Official
Prior to demolition activities.
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-18 June 2022
Impact
Number Mitigation Measure
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing of Implementation
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
emergency response procedures, and
recordkeeping of identified asbestos
contaminated materials. The plan shall be
reviewed and approved by the City of East
Palo Alto prior to implementation.
HAZ-1 MM HAZ-1.2 Lead Based Paint and PCB
Operation and Management Plan
Prior to any renovations or demolition, the
project applicant shall implement the
recommendations of the LBP O&M Plan for
work involving lead based painted surface
areas to be carried out. These measures
include training and special work
procedures for employees managing leadbased paint materials, notification procedures for building owners and
occupants, emergency response
procedures, and recordkeeping of
identified lead-based paint materials. The
plan shall be reviewed and approved by the
City of East Palo Alto prior to
implementation. The project shall also
follow current San Francisco Bay Regional
Water Quality Control Board requirements
Project
Applicant; City
Building Official
Prior to any renovations or
demolition activities.
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-19 June 2022
Impact
Number Mitigation Measure
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing of Implementation
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
for identifying and controlling PCB’s during
building demolition, if present.
Noise & Vibration
N-1 MM N-1.1 Construction Noise Reduction
Prior to Grading Permit issuance, the
applicant shall demonstrate, to the
satisfaction of the City of East Palo Alto
Director of Public Works or City Engineer
that all applicable construction plans and
specification include the following
measures:
• Construction activities shall be
restricted to daytime hours of between
7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on weekdays.
• Prior to the start of construction
activities, the construction contractor
shall:
o Maintain and tune all proposed
equipment in accordance with
the manufacturer’s
recommendations to minimize
noise emission.
Project
Applicant;
Director of Public
Works or City
Engineer
Prior to issuance of grading permit
issuance.
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-20 June 2022
Impact
Number Mitigation Measure
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing of Implementation
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
o Inspect all proposed equipment
and should fit all equipment with
properly operating mufflers, air
intake silencers, and engine
shrouds that are no less effective
than as originally equipped by
the manufacturer.
o Post a sign, clearly visible at the
site, with a contact name and
telephone number of the City of
East Palo Alto’s authorized
representative to respond in the
event of a noise complaint.
o Place stationary construction
equipment and material delivery
in loading and unloading areas
as far as practicable from the
residences.
o Limit unnecessary engine idling
to the extent feasible.
o Use smart back-up alarms, which
automatically adjust the alarm
level based on the background
noise level, or switch off back-up
alarms and replace with human
spotters.
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-21 June 2022
Impact
Number Mitigation Measure
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing of Implementation
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
o Use low-noise emission
equipment.
o Limit use of public address
systems.
o Minimize grade surface
irregularities on construction
sites.
Transportation & Circulation
TRA-2 MM TRA-2.1 Traffic Calming Measures
Prior to operational use of the parking
garage, the project applicant shall install
traffic calming measures at the Bayshore
Road/Manhattan Avenue location to
reduce traffic speeds and improve the
safety of driveway movements. Such
measures could include advisory speeds
signs, advanced warning signage along
Manhattan Avenue and Bayshore Road,
roadway bulbouts, raised dots, parking
restrictions or other physical
improvements. Final traffic calming
measures will be determined in
consultation with City of East Palo Alto
City Public Works
Department
Final measures determined prior to
final improvement plans.
Implementation/installation prior to
operation of the parking garage.
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-22 June 2022
Impact
Number Mitigation Measure
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing of Implementation
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
Public Works staff during review of
improvement plans.
Utilities & Service Systems
UTIL-1 Refer to MM AES-2.1, SC AQ-2.1, SC AQ3.1, MM AQ-3.1, MM GHG-1.1, MM HAZ1.1, MM HAZ-1.2, MM N-1.1Refer to Impact AES-2, AQ-2, AQ3, GHG-1, HAZ-1,
and N-1.
Refer to Impact AES-2, AQ-2, AQ-3,
GHG-1, HAZ-1, and N-1.
UTIL-3 MM UTIL-3.1 Fair Share Funding of Project
Improvements
The project applicant shall either fund the
fair share of construction of physical sewer
line improvements (pipe upgrades)
immediately downstream of the project,
provide fair share funding toward system
wide sanitary sewer system improvements,
or a reasonable combination of both. The
project’s financial and implementation
responsibility for sewer capacity
improvements shall be determined in
consultation with the City of East Palo Alto
Public Works Department. Fair share
funding of common improvements to the
city-wide system would also address the
City Public Works
Department
Prior to issuance of building permits
City of East Palo Alto Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project Final EIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program | Page 4-23 June 2022
Impact
Number Mitigation Measure
Monitoring/
Reporting
Responsibility
Timing of Implementation
City Staff
Notes;
Initials/Date
when Done
project’s contribution to significant
cumulative effects. Funding or construction
of common improvements shall occur prior
to the issuance of building permits or as
determined by the City. The project’s fair
share of responsibility shall be
proportionate to the impact. The project
shall not be responsible for mitigating all
existing deficiencies.
UTIL-5 Refer to MM AES-2.1, SC AQ-2.1, SC AQ3.1, MM AQ-3.1, MM GHG-1.1, MM HAZ1.1, MM HAZ-1.2, MM N-1.1Refer to Impact AES-2, AQ-2, AQ3, GHG-1, HAZ-1,
and N-1.
Refer to Impact AES-2, AQ-2, AQ-3,
GHG-1, HAZ-1, and N-1.
ATTACHMENT B: STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
1 City of East Palo Alto
Draft Findings Required Under the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.)
For the Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project
1. Introduction
A public agency may not approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified that identifies one or more significant environmental effects, unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects. Each finding much be accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding (CEQA Guidelines Section 15091).
The City of East Palo Alto (City) prepared a Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project (Project) in May 2022.
The project is a proposal for a General Plan and zoning amendment that would create a Neighborhood Center Residential Overlay (NCO). The NCO designation would establish new development standards for the property that would be applied to the proposed project. The NCO would allow for neighborhoodserving commercial and community uses on the ground floors, additional housing units, and increased building heights.
With the NCO overlay, the project would demolish and remove 161 existing apartment units and replace all existing structures with three buildings (Buildings A, B and C) supporting 605 residential units ranging in size from studios to 2 bedrooms (two of the units would be 3-4 bedrooms). The project would be divided into two main sections on either side of Euclid Avenue. The south side of Euclid contains the majority of the development (Buildings B and C), including residential structures with a lobby/common area, central parking garage, community space/neighborhood serving retail and open space/park area.
Although the building heights vary considerably in design, the tallest structure (Building C) would be up to 13 levels.
The project is proposed to be constructed in a single action, but with primary structures constructed in sequence to allow planned construction staging and flow of materials and equipment. The general sequence of activity would involve demolition, excavation, utility relocation, site grading and foundations, building erection, and final finishes. Construction activities are anticipated to last approximately 18 to 24 months. The Final EIR identified several significant or potentially significant environmental effects associated with project implementation.
The Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations set forth below (Findings) are presented for consideration by the Planning Commission and adoption by the City Council as the City’s independent findings under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.).
The Findings provide the written explanation, evidence, reasoning and conclusions of the City regarding the project’s environmental impacts, mitigation measures, alternatives, and the overriding 2 considerations, which in the City’s judgement, justify approval of Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project despite residual environmental effects.
2. Record of Proceedings and Custodian of Record
For purposes of CEQA and the findings set forth herein, the record of proceedings for the City of East Palo Alto’s findings and determinations consist of the following documents and testimony as compiled for the project:
• The Notice of Preparation (NOP), comments received on the NOP, comments received at the public scoping meeting, and all other public notices issued by the City. • Draft EIR, associated appendices to the Draft EIR, and technical materials cited in the • Draft EIR.
• Final EIR, including comment letters, responses to comments, errata and technical materials cited in the Final EIR.
• Staff reports associated with Planning Commission and City Council hearings on the project. • Those categories of materials identified in Public Resources Code Section 21167.6, which establishes the contents for the record of proceedings.
The City is the custodian of the administrative record. The documents and materials that constitute the administrative record are available for review at the City of East Palo Alto Community and Economic Development Department, 1960 Tate Street, East Palo Alto, CA 94303.
3. Severability
If any term, provision, or portion of these Findings or the application of these Findings to a particular situation is held by a court to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of these Findings, or their application to other actions related to the project, shall continue in full force and effect unless amended or modified by the City.
4. Findings for Significant Impacts that Can Be Avoided or Reduced to a Less Than Significant Level with Implementation of Mitigation Measures
Impact AES-3: The project would introduce new sources of light and glare to the project site and project area.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure (MM) AES-3.1 requires anti-reflective glass to be incorporated into the project, specifically to minimize reflective glare. Such materials can vary but typically consist of matte or patterned finishes that serve to both reduce reflective glare and reduce risk of bird strike. The East Palo Alto Municipal Code requires that the project’s lighting plan be reviewed and approved for code consistency. These standard and project-specific measures reduce the impact to a less than significant level through project design changes and compliance with existing review procedures, which have been made conditions of project approval. 3 Impact AQ-2: The project could result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of a criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
Rationale/Evidence: Standard Condition SC AQ-2.1and AQ-2.2 require management and specific methods to control construction dust and pollutants and reduce the impact to a less than significant level by lowering the levels of dust and exhaust emissions. The measures are recognized as effective by the Air District and would be included on construction documents and enforceable as conditions of approval and through response to nuisance complaints to a designated compliance monitor.
Impact AQ-3: The project could expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
Rationale/Evidence: Standard Condition SC AQ-3-1 would require buildings to include air filters with performance standards as part of the ventilation system to reduce particulates. Also, MM AQ-3.1 requires Tier 4 engines in mobile diesel-powered off-road equipment or equivalent. The reduction in particulates has been quantified through detailed modeling. By reducing diesel particulate matter at the source and equipping ventilations systems with air filters, this potentially significant impact to sensitive receptors would be effectively mitigated.
Impact BIO-1: The project could interfere with the movement of native resident or migratory (avian) wildlife and/or associated nursery sites.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
Rationale/Evidence: MM BIO-1.1 requires that all on-site tree removal, demolition and grading occur outside the nesting and breeding seasons to avoid nest disturbance within existing urban trees. As an alternative, the applicant may conduct bird surveys and establish buffer zones around nests, if identified on site. These measures would be effective by directly avoiding potential effects on nesting birds or by protecting nesting birds with the oversight of a professional biologist. These measures have been made conditions of project approval and would work together to provide a rational and enforceable program of impact avoidance.
Impact CR-2: The project has the potential to cause a substantial adverse change to known and unknown archaeological and cultural resources and human remains.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
Rationale/Evidence: MM CR-2.1 and CR-2.2 provide specific direction to construction personnel and the applicant in the event that archaeological resources, tribal cultural resources or human remains are encountered during the construction process. These measures would be effective because they require halting construction, establishing setbacks, avoiding resources and contacting a qualified archaeologist to assess the find prior to continuing with work consistent with State law. These 4 measures would be applied to construction documents and enforced as conditions of project approval in order to avoid and properly treat and handle archaeological, tribal, and other cultural resources in the event they are encountered.
Impact CR-3: The project has the potential to cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
Rationale/Evidence: MM CR-2.1 and CR-2.2 provide specific direction to construction personnel and the applicant in the event that archaeological resources, tribal cultural resources or human remains are encountered during the construction process. These measures would be effective because they require halting construction, establishing setbacks, avoiding resources and contacting a qualified archaeologist to assess the find prior to continuing with work consistent with State law. These measures would be applied to construction documents and enforced as conditions of project approval in order to avoid and properly treat and handle archaeological, tribal, and other cultural resources in the event they are encountered.
Impact GEO-5: The project is located on a geologic unit or soil that could be either unstable, or that could become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, collapse or expansive soils.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
Rationale/Evidence: MM GEO-5.1 requires a construction-level geotechnical evaluation to ensure that all standards and recommended engineering solutions related to geologic and soil stability are incorporated to meet State and local building codes. Application of this required evaluation in the design and construction process pursuant to building codes would effectively mitigate these potential risks.
Impact GEO-6: The project could directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic features during construction.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
Rationale/Evidence: MM GEO-6.1 specifies actions that must take place in the event that fossils or fossil-bearing deposits are identified during construction. The measure requires a work stoppage and a buffer zone around the find and a professional assessment of the resources consistent with the Public Resources Code. This measure would be effective because it is proportional to the likelihood of a paleontological find, and specifies techniques to protect and/or preserve any such resource. This measure would be applied to construction documents and enforced as conditions of project approval in order to avoid and properly treat and handle paleontological resources. 5 Impact GHG-1: The project could generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that could have a significant impact on the environment.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
Rationale/Evidence: MM GHG-1.1 requires approval and implementation of a commute trip reduction/transportation demand management (TDM) plan. This plan provides specific performance standards and measures for reducing project related vehicle trips, which in turn would reduce criteria pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions to less than significant levels. This plan is a condition of project approval and requires annual monitoring for effectiveness.
Impact HAZ-1: The project has the potential to create a hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
Rationale/Evidence: MM HAZ-1.1 would effectively mitigate this impact to a less than significant level by implementing an asbestos operation and management plan that includes specific measures for the protection of employees, handling and management of contaminated materials associated with demolition. MM HAZ-1.2 similarly requires implementation of a lead-based paint and PCB operation and management plan that includes specific measures and recommendations to handle and manage those contaminants. These measures would be effective to mitigate risk of hazards because they require review by the City prior to implementation, and consistency with State and local codes. These plans would be made conditions of approval on final plans and implemented during construction.
Impact HAZ-2: The project could create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
Rationale/Evidence: MM HAZ-1.1 would effectively mitigate this impact to a less than significant level by implementing an asbestos operation and management plan that includes specific measures for the protection of employees, handling and management of contaminated materials associated with demolition. MM HAZ-1.2 similarly requires implementation of a lead-based paint and PCB operation and management plan that includes specific measures and recommendations to manage those contaminants. These measures would be effective to mitigate risk of hazards because they require review by the City prior to implementation, and consistency with State and local codes. These plans would be made conditions of approval on final plans and implemented during construction. materials, and are enforceable as a conditions of project approval during construction.
Impact HAZ-3: The project would handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
Rationale/Evidence: MM HAZ-1.1 would effectively mitigate this impact to a less than significant level by implementing an asbestos operation and management plan that includes specific measures for the protection of employees, handling and management of contaminated materials associated with 6 demolition. MM HAZ-1.2 similarly requires implementation of a lead-based paint and PCB operation and management plan that includes specific measures and recommendations to manage those contaminants. These measures would be effective to mitigate risk of hazards because they require review by the City prior to implementation, and consistency with State and local codes. These plans would be made conditions of approval on final plans and implemented during construction. materials, and are enforceable as a conditions of project approval during construction.
Impact N-1: The project would generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
Rationale/Evidence: MM N-1.1 provides a series of standard measures to reduce temporary construction noise. These measures focus on compliance with the City Municipal Code and General Plan. Construction noise can be effectively addressed through construction timing, equipment maintenance, and placement of equipment. The quantitative analysis in the EIR demonstrates that these measures reduce the impact to a less than significant level by physically reducing noise levels and by avoiding the generation of excessive noise. Both measures are enforceable as conditions of approval and included in construction documents.
Impact TRA-2: The project could substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible use.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
Rationale/Evidence: MM TRA-2.1 requires in installation of specific traffic calming measures at Bayshore Road/Manhattan Avenue to reduce speeds and improve safety near the main project driveway. These physical measures, recommended by a transportation engineer and reviewed by the City Engineer, would effectively improve safety by adding signage and reducing speeds in this location. The measures are required as part of the final improvement plans and are enforceable as conditions of project approval.
Impact UTIL-1: The project will require construction to connect and/or upgrade service systems to service the project.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
Rationale/Evidence: MM AES-2.1, SC AQ-2.1, MM AQ-3.1, MM GHG-1.1, MM HAZ-1.1, MM HAZ-1.2, and MM N-1.1 are the mitigation measures of the Final EIR that directly address construction-related impacts. As the construction of project utility and service systems are directly related to and incorporated into the overall development and construction program for the project, these measures would effectively reduce or eliminate construction-related effects for the same reasons explained elsewhere in these Findings.
7 Impact UTIL-5: The project could contribute to cumulatively considerable utilities and service system impacts.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
Rationale/Evidence: MM AES-2.1, SC AQ-2.1, MM AQ-3.1, MM GHG-1.1, MM HAZ-1.1, MM HAZ-1.2, and MM N-1.1 are the mitigation measures of the Final EIR that directly address construction-related impacts on both a project-specific and cumulative level. As the construction of project utility and service systems are directly related to and incorporated into the overall development and construction program for the project, these measures would effectively reduce or eliminate construction-related effects for the same reasons explained elsewhere in these Findings.
4. Findings for Significant Impacts that Cannot Be Avoided or Reduced to a Less Than Significant Level (Significant and Unavoidable Effects) Impact AES-2: The project could potentially conflict with existing zoning for this urban area that governs scenic quality.
Finding: Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations make additional mitigation measures or alternatives infeasible.
Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measures MM AES-2.1 and AES-2.2 require construction screening around the site to soften visual effects and to screen the visibility of the proposed water tank. These specific measures would effectively mitigate visual changes related to the water tank and temporary construction effects at the site. However, the Final EIR finds that the zoning change requested would lead to substantial intensification of development in this portion of the City, and in turn may conflict with zoning and code requirements that govern scenic quality. The overall change in allowable density and height is significantly and fundamentally different than the existing development pattern and the contrast between the existing and resulting urban form.
Alternatives to address the overall size and mass of the proposal – through transferring heights between buildings and reducing the scale of the project - were provided and analyzed in the Final EIR.
However, the Final EIR concluded that these concessions would not reduce the primary impact of visual change and character to a less than significant level. Please see Statement of Overriding Considerations below.
Impact UTIL-3: The wastewater treatment provider, via the Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant (PARWQCP), has sufficient capacity within its treatment system to accommodate the project.
However, deficiencies have been identified in the capacity of the wastewater conveyance system that could be further affected by the project.
Finding: Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations make additional mitigation measures or alternatives infeasible.
Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM UTIL-3.1 requires either fair-share funding toward sewer infrastructure improvements, direct construction of improvements, or a combination of both based on the project’s contribution. However, the Final EIR found that even with this mitigation and nexus to the project, other deficiencies within the City’s sewer system would not be fully addressed 8 by the project and therefore the project’s impact to these deficiencies would remain significant. An alternative to the project – to connect to the West Bay Sanitation District – could effectively address this impact. However, the feasibility of alternative is not assured given the potential legal, political, technological, and engineering challenges to be addressed.
Please see Statement of Overriding Considerations below.
5. Findings for Significant Cumulative Effects
The Final EIR discusses the project’s potential cumulative effects consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15130. This discussion considers the project’s incremental contribution to potentially significant impacts when combined with other past, present and/or probably future projects within relevant geographic limits. The Final EIR concluded that no specific or unique cumulatively considerable impacts would be triggered by the project when combined with other cumulative development projects being implemented or considered. While sewer capacity issues have been identified as significant and unavoidable at the project level, mitigation measure MM UTIL-3.1 effectively addresses the project’s cumulative contribution to this existing deficiency by contributing fair share funding and/or physical infrastructure improvements toward a common engineering solution to be shared by the City and other development.
6. Findings Regarding Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes Which Would be Caused by the Project Should it be Implemented
Section 15126.2(d) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires an EIR for certain projects to discuss the significant irreversible environmental changes that would result from implementation of a proposed Project. This discussion focuses on the commitment or use of nonrenewable resources during project construction and operation.
Construction of the proposed project would require the commitment of a variety of non-renewable or slowly renewable natural resources such as lumber and other forest products, sand and gravel, asphalt, petrochemicals, and metals. The City of East Palo Alto finds such commitments insignificant for the following reasons:
1. The project is located in a developed urban area and will not convert prime agricultural land, preclude access to mineral resources, or otherwise commit ongoing or large quantities of nonrenewable resources (through removal or nonuse).
2. None of the resources required for construction are unique, rare or in danger of being depleted by the project.
3. Use of defined water resources would not deplete or threaten existing supplies of surface or groundwater resources.
4. The project does not include components (such as a highway or roadway that provides access to a previously in accessible area) that would lead to associated secondary impacts or commit future generations to such irreversible changes.
9 5. The project would not lead to irreversible damage from environmental accidents because the proposed residential and retail uses do not present such risks.
7. Findings Regarding Potential Growth Inducing Effects CEQA defines a project as growth inducing if it “could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment”.
Similarly, under CEQA, a project would indirectly induce growth if it would remove an obstacle to additional growth and development, such as removing a constraint on a required public service.
Increases in population could tax existing community service facilities, requiring construction of new facilities that could cause significant environmental effects.
The City of East Palo Alto finds the following regarding the project’s potential growth inducing effects:
The Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project would directly induce growth within the community by increasing the development intensity on the subject parcels and increasing the total number of apartments in this location by up to 444 units.
The project could also induce growth indirectly by making certain infrastructure improvements, specifically increased water system capacity for municipal storage and fire flow, that could improve water reliability on the Westside. The project’s infrastructure upgrades would accommodate the project but would also be considered a public benefit to address existing system constraints on the Westside.
With improved infrastructure systems and utility capacity, barriers to further intensification may be removed to some degree, allowing for other projects to move forward on the Westside and elsewhere.
A second source of indirect growth inducement may also occur because the project may serve as a catalyst for new redevelopment and intensification efforts on the Westside. A well-designed project of this size, if successfully implemented, could conceivably stimulate the market for similar projects on other Westside properties. If such projects are constructed at a higher density than existing development and existing zoning, the project could be considered growth inducing.
These potential scenarios for growth inducement, however, are consistent with the vision of the Westside Area Plan (WAP). While the WAP does not prescribe a specific level of intensification the policies within the plan clearly envision higher densities with a high level of architectural quality and design and community benefits. Such benefits include expanding the City’s inventory of affordable housing opportunities.
The environmental implications of land use intensification on the Westside would be evaluated on a project-specific and cumulative basis as projects are processed and evaluated under CEQA. The General Plan EIR also considered assumptions and changes in land use at a programmatic level. While the project could result in growth inducing environmental effects, such effects have been anticipated within the framework of the City’s planning efforts in the Westside and city-wide. 10 8. Findings Regarding Project Alternatives
Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (c), the City of East Palo Alto makes the following findings regarding the alternatives considered in the Final EIR:
1. No Project Alternative. The No Project alternative would be environmentally superior but meets none of the stated objectives of the project. The neighborhood would be maintained and operate similar to existing conditions, buildings would continue to age and require continued maintenance, and no specific public benefits or infrastructure improvements would be realized.
For this reason, the alternative has been rejected.
2. Alternative A, Transfer of Heights. This alternative would consolidate and concentrate the higher building elements of the project near the freeway. The total number of apartment units and parking spaces is assumed to be the same as the proposed project, but in a different configuration that raises Building C significantly. The purpose of this alternative is to address community character concerns of project bulk and mass within the existing neighborhood by reducing the height of Buildings A and B within the neighborhood.
Alternative A would meet most or all of the primary project objectives, but it would result in potentially greater impacts to aesthetics in comparison to the other alternatives. While this alternative would concentrate the higher elements near the freeway, it would be considerably more visible and prominent from many vantage points and extend the project’s shadows. For these reasons, Alternative A is not environmentally superior to the proposed project or the other alternatives and therefore has been rejected.
3. Alternative B: Reduced Scale Alternative. Under this alternative, Buildings B and C essentially become one large 8-story structures 81 feet high, eliminating the “high rise” that was Building C.
Building A west of Euclid Avenue would remain unchanged. This alternative would result in approximately 460 apartment units (a 24 percent reduction) and 480 parking spaces within the parking structure.
This alternative would meet some, but not all, of the project objectives regarding affordable housing; however, community benefits and open space objectives would be difficult to meet.
Alternative B would incrementally reduce the overall visual impact of the proposal through the elimination of the high-rise tower and by providing less intensification within the existing neighborhood. With less intensification, this alternative would incrementally reduce demands on infrastructure and public service systems and reduce vehicle miles travelled, which translates to a reduction in air quality and GHG emissions, noise, and traffic operational effects. As a tradeoff for reduced development intensity, community benefits (e.g. affordable housing commitments, commercial areas, park and community space, and/or larger infrastructure improvements) are also assumed to be reduced, which could reduce or eliminate some of the basic project objectives and intentions regarding these benefits. Alternative B would not, however, fully mitigate the significant and unavoidable effects associated with visual resources, aesthetics and community character as identified in this Draft EIR. And despite the reduction in 11 intensity, Alternative B would still exacerbate capacity constraints on the sewer system. For these reasons, the alternative has been rejected.
4. Alternative C: Water System Intertie Alternative. This alternative would eliminate the construction of the 1.5-million-gallon water tank proposed at 375 Donohoe Street. As an alternative to that infrastructure improvement, the applicant would complete an emergency intertie with the City of Palo Alto’s water system at University Avenue. All other aspects of the project would remain the same.
This alternative is more narrowly focused on key infrastructure systems and improvements. As such, the alternative would meet the basic objective of improving water infrastructure on the West Side. Alternative C would have some environmental benefits, as it would slightly reduce the project’s effects related to aesthetics, air quality, cultural and tribal cultural resources, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, hydrology and water quality, and noise related to construction and operation of the 1.5-million-gallon water tank at 375 Donohoe Street.
However, these effects would only be reduced by a matter of degree, and impact reduction would be very localized to the parcels immediately adjacent to this parcel. This alternative would not reduce the significant unavoidable effect of the project related to visual resources, but it would reduce visual impacts incrementally and would avoid additional tree removal (without construction of the tank).
5. Alternative D: West Bay Sanitation District Connection. This alternative would convey wastewater from the project site approximately 4,000 linear feet to the north, to a new connection point with existing WBSD conveyance infrastructure. To make this connection, the project would require an on-site pump station and construction of a project-specific force main under US 101 to Donohoe Street.
This alternative is focused on key infrastructure systems and improvements to avoid existing constraints. As such, the alternative would meet the basic objective of improving wastewater service on the West Side and all other project objectives. Alternative D, West Bay Sanitation District Connection, would be the Environmentally Superior Alternative. This alternative would directly address and mitigate one the project’s otherwise unavoidable impacts (sewer capacity).
The potential impacts of the remaining areas of study are very similar to the project. However, due to certain political (District, LAFCO) circumstances and engineering constraints, implementation of this alternative faces feasibility challenges that would need to be resolved.
5. Statement of Overriding Considerations
CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region-wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region-wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposal project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered “acceptable.” 12 When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the Final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the Final EIR and/or other information in the record. The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record (CEQA Guidelines Section 15093).
The City of East Palo Alto concludes that the project’s relative benefits outweigh its residual environmental effects for the following reasons:
1. Consistency with Overall Vision of the General Plan and Westside Area Plan. Under the City of East Palo Alto’s existing General Plan Vision 2035, the subject properties have designations of High Density Residential (HDR, 22-43 du/ac) or Urban Residential (UR, 43-86 du/ac). High Density Residential allows a range of multi-family housing types ranging from townhomes to multi-family apartments at moderate to high densities. The purpose of this designation is to provide for higher density multi-family housing to meet the City’s desire for a variety of housing types. This designation is located in areas with a diverse mix of uses within walking distance of homes, as well as in neighborhoods that already exhibit a high degree of diversity in the type and density of residential housing.
The Westside Area Plan provides a detailed vision, guiding principles, and goals and policies for the Westside area of East Palo Alto, but is less prescriptive. The Plan focuses on tools to preserve a stock of affordable housing and improve the quality of life for residents. The Westside Area Plan guidelines seek to avoid displacement, provide affordable rental housing, maintain population diversity, improve housing quality, maintain diversity of housing types and unit sizes, and beautify the Westside. The Plan contains specific project application requirements for development projects within its boundaries, particularly projects that proposed to intensify land uses.
The project would create a Neighborhood Center Residential Overlay (NCO) designation as an amendment to the General Plan. This General Plan Amendment and zoning overlay would allow for neighborhood-serving commercial and community uses on the ground floor, additional housing units beyond current densities, and increased building heights on High Density Residential (HDR) and Urban Residential (UR) land use designations that underly the NCO overlay designation. As proposed, allowed uses under the NCO overlay could include highdensity, multi-family dwellings such as rental apartments, condominiums, single room occupancy (SRO) developments, neighborhood-serving commercial, and parks/plazas/open space, education, cultural, public assembly, and public uses. Other uses may be allowed if they are compatible and serve the needs of residents living in the higher-density residences. All uses, densities, building heights and resulting building form created the NCO overlay would be specific to the project site and reviewed against those specific development standards as adopted.
However, all other standard ordinances and City and State performance standards remain applicable.
Upon review of the General Plan land use and urban design policies that address environmental protection (as well as additional policies throughout the chapters the Final EIR), there is no 13 indication that the project, as mitigated, would be in direct conflict with these guiding policies.
For example, the project:
• Does not conflict with any protected natural resource areas. • Seeks to maintain an urban form and land use pattern that enhances the quality of life. • Would expand the number, types and diversity of housing. • Improves the City’s image and physical appearance through design.
Because the project as proposed is fundamentally compatible with the environmental objectives and vision of the General Plan and Westside Area Plan, the residual environmental effects - significant changes in visual character due zoning changes and near-term sewer capacity – are considered acceptable environmental consequences. The project would implement this vision as adopted by the City. In terms of sewer system capacity, the City and project developers are actively working with EPASD and WBSD on engineering solutions identified in master plan documents are that are understood to be cumulative issues that will ultimately be addressed by public/private partnerships to service future growth in East Palo Alto consistent with adopted plans and programs.
2. Improved Housing Stock. The project as proposed would replace 161 existing apartment units that are at the end of their physical design life. Replacement of these units, in addition to up to 444 additional new units, would improve the overall quality of the City’s housing stock for both existing residents and new residents. The social and quality of life benefits of these units would outweigh the residual environmental effects related to visual character and near-term sewer constraints.
3. Economic Benefits to the City of East Palo Alto. The residential and commercial uses would generate significant annual property taxes, and to a lesser degree sales tax. These direct economic benefits to the City’s annual budget would provide greater opportunity for enhanced City services, programs, and capital improvements. The project would also generate hundreds construction jobs over a 2+ year period, providing local and region-wide employment opportunities. The scale of these economic benefits would outweigh the residual environmental effects related to visual character and near-term sewer constraints.
4. Affordable Housing and Community Benefits. The project as proposed would result in a significant net increase in affordable housing and would maintain rent stabilized housing consistent with the City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Providing these housing opportunities in the City is consistent with the goals of the General Plan and Westside Area Plan, without displacing existing residents. In addition, the project would result in a new water tank to improve the City’s fire flow and storage needs, would provide common urban open space within the project, and would contribute financially toward improving the City’s infrastructure and public service needs. The social, economic and technological benefits of these components of the project would outweigh the residual (unavoidable) environmental effects related to visual character and near-term sewer constraints.