East Palo Alto City Council
November 1, 2022

EAST PALO ALTO

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
DATE: September 6, 2022
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Patrick Heisinger, Interim City Manager
BY: Kelly Beggs, Consultant Planner
Elena Lee, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Woodland Park Euclid Improvements
Recommendation

1. Adopt a resolution:
- Certifying that the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) has been done in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); - Adopting a Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Plan pursuant to Public Resources Code 21000 and the CEQAGuidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000);
- Adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations;
- Directing the Community and Economic Development Director to File a Notice of Determination within five working days of adoption pursuant to Section 15075 of the CEQA Guidelines

2. Adopt a Resolution approving the General Plan Amendment (GP19-001) establishing the Neighborhood Center Overlay Land Use Designation;

3. Introduce Ordinances enacting the Development Code and Zoning Map amendments (ZC19-002) establishing the Neighborhood Center Overlay District;

4. Adopt a resolution:
- Approving the Design Review Permit (DR 19-028), Conditional Use Permit (CUP22- 003), and Tentative Parcel Map (TTM19-001) based on the findings, requirements and conditions of approval which are Attachments to the resolutions and incorporated by reference;
- Approving the Relocation Plan dated September 2022; and - Authorizing the City Manager to execute a Notice of Special Restrictions applying the City's Rent Stabilization Ordinance to 160 new/replacement units in a form approved by the City Attorney.

5. Introduce an Ordinance approving the Proposed Development Agreement for the Woodland Park Euclid Improvements Project
Alignment with City Council Strategic Plan
This recommendation is primarily aligned with:

Priority No. 2: Enhance Economic Vitality
Priority No. 4: Improve Public Facilities and Infrastructure Priority No. 6: Create a Healthy and Safe Community
Proposal and Project Detail
The Applicant is seeking City approval of the following Project, as described in Table 1:

TABLE 1: PROJECT DATA
Project Element Detail/Description
Applicant / Owner Woodland Park Communities/Sand Hill Property Company (“Applicant,” “Developer”)
Location 2001 Manhattan Avenue and 375 Donahoe Street
(“Site”, “Property”)
Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APN) Mixed-Use Development Site: Avenue/063-281-020, - 030, -040, -100, -110; 063-282-010, -020, -030, -040, - 050, -060, -070, -080 and -090
Water Tank Site: 375 Donahoe Street/ 063-148-110, -
120, -130
Size of Site 3.92 acres
Existing Use Multi-family residential
General Plan Designation High Density Residential and Urban Residential Existing Zoning R-HD-5; R-UHD
Surrounding Zoning C-O, R-HD-5, C-N and R-UHD
Special Designation None
Requested Entitlements
• General Plan Amendment
• Development Code and Zoning Map Amendment
• Design Review Permit
• Conditional Use Permit for Demolition of
Affordable Units
• Certification of an Environmental Impact Report
• Adoption of CEQA Findings and Statement of
Overriding Considerations
• Tentative Map
• Development Agreement
Number of Stories / Height Bldg. 1: 9 – 13 stories/ 88-135 feet Bldg. 2: 13 stories/ 135 feet
Bldg. 3: 5 stories/ 55 feet
Residential Units 605 units
Number of Parking Spaces 625 spaces
Number of Bicycle Parking Spaces 324 long-term; 45 short-term Developer Seeking Deviations from Yes, increases in height and residential density; TABLE 1: PROJECT DATA
Project Element Detail/Description
Existing Requirements? decreases in setbacks and required off-street parking Background
In January 2019, Woodland Park Communities/Sand Hill Property Company (“Applicant”) submitted a Planning pre-application for the Project. Following the preapplication review process, the Applicant formally submitted a Planning application in September 2019. Since 2020, the City Council and Planning Commission have held multiple Study Sessions regarding different aspects of the Project (e.g. infrastructure, affordable housing, urban design), as described below:
• May 6, 2019: Planning Commission Pre-application Study Session http://eastpaloalto.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1227 • February 25, 2020: City Council Study Session
http://eastpaloalto.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1068 • September 10, 2020: City Council Study Session on Inclusionary Housing Plan http://eastpaloalto.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1316 • October 6, 2020: City Council Study Session on Inclusionary Housing Plan http://eastpaloalto.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1284 • November 19, 2020: City Council Study Session on Infrastructure http://eastpaloalto.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1340 • February 23, 2021: City Council Study Session on Inclusionary Housing Plan and Fiscal Impact Report
http://eastpaloalto.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1357 • June 22, 2021: City Council Study Session on Inclusionary Housing Plan http://eastpaloalto.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1403 • July 26, 2021: Planning Commission Draft EIR Public Hearing http://eastpaloalto.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1369 • October 5, 2021: City Council Study Session on Inclusionary Housing Plan http://eastpaloalto.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1427 • November 30, 2021: City Council Study Session on Tenant Relocation Plan http://eastpaloalto.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1458 • February 15, 2022: City Council Study Session on Tenant Relocation Plan http://eastpaloalto.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1488 • June 27, 2022: Planning Commission Policy and Action Discussion http://eastpaloalto.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1832 • July 25, 2022: Planning Commission Public Hearing on Project http://eastpaloalto.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1855 The project details, including the Draft EIR (DEIR), Final EIR (FEIR), and Fiscal Impact Analysis are available at the project website:
https://www.cityofepa.org/planning/project/woodland-park-euclid-improvements-generalplan-amendment-zoning-amendment-and Pursuant to East Palo Alto Municipal Code (EPAMC) Section 18.82.020, the Planning Commission made a recommendation to City Council for certification of the FEIR and approval of the legislative actions for the project, consisting of General Plan Amendment, Development Code Text/Zoning Map Amendments, and Development Agreement. According to EPAMC Section 18.86.060, if an application usually subject to determination by the Planning Commission is filed concurrently with a discretionary land use application that requires Council approval, the decision over all entitlements is made by the higher authority, the City Council. Therefore, the City Council is also the approval authority for the Design Review, Conditional Use Permit, and Tentative Map applications for the project.

Planning Commission and City Council authority over this project’s various aspects is shown below.

TABLE 2: Authority over Entitlement
Approval
Planning
Commission
City Council
Quasi-Judicial Permits and Actions
Conditional Use Permit Recommend Decide
Design Review Recommend Decide
EIR Recommend Certify
CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding
Consideration
Recommend Adopt
Tentative Map Recommend Decide
Legislative Actions
Development Agreement Recommend Decide
Development Code Text/Zoning Map
Amendment
Recommend Decide
General Plan Text/Map Amendments Recommend Decide
Plans and Reports
Tenant Relocation Plan (WSAP Policy 5.5 and

5.10)
Informational Decide
Community Impact Report (WSAP Policy 5.5) Informational Decide Fiscal Impact Analysis Informational Informational
Existing Conditions
The subject properties consist of 15 buildings with a total of 161 existing residential units. The majority of the existing buildings are approximately 50 years old, with a few structures that are up to 100 years old. Existing structures range from one to four stories in height and have a simple architectural style. The buildings are part of the larger Woodland Park community, which consists of mostly of multiple-family residential uses in an established residential neighborhood. Surrounding land uses are also primarily residential, with some local serving neighborhood commercial, as described in Table 3 below. The Four Seasons Hotel/University Circle complex, a mix of office and hotel uses, is located immediately to the southeast.

TABLE 3: Existing Uses Surrounding the Project Site
Direction General Plan Designation Zoning District Existing Use North
High Density Residential R-HD-5 2- and 3- story multiple-family residential
US 101
South High Density Residential R-HD-5 2-story multiple-family residential TABLE 3: Existing Uses Surrounding the Project Site
Direction General Plan Designation Zoning District Existing Use Neighborhood Commercial C-N Laundromat, Grocery store
East Office C-O Four Seasons Hotel
University Circle Office Complex
West High Density Residential R-HD-5 3-story multiple-family residential Urban Residential R-UHD 2-story multiple-family residential Project Description
Proposed Buildings
As proposed, the project would merge 14 individual parcels into two parcels on both sides of Euclid Avenue. The existing individual buildings on these parcels would be demolished and three new buildings would be constructed, as shown in the figure below.

The project would be divided into two main sections on both sides of Euclid Avenue.

The south side of Euclid would contain most of the development, including residential structures with a lobby/common area, central parking garage, community space/neighborhood serving retail and open space/park area.

BLDG 2
BLDG 3
BLDG 1
Building 1 ranges in height from nine levels with a height of approximately 85 feet to 13 levels with a height of 120 feet to roof level (130 feet to parapet). This building wraps around the central parking garage on three sides and includes ground floor retail and community function space along the O’Connor Street frontage. Building 1 connects to Building 2 with elevated walkways at Levels 3 through 9. Building 2 is 13 levels in height and approximately 120 feet at the roof level and 135 feet to top of parapet. North of Euclid Avenue is Building 3, a single residential building with a lobby area and community garden space. This building is five levels and approximately 55 feet in height.

Access, Circulation and Parking
The project would maintain the local circulation network without altering existing routes or traffic flow. A 625-space central parking garage would be located in the center of the project with main garage access off Manhattan Avenue, resulting in fewer driveway access points along local roads. 52 on-street parking spaces would be provided on Manhattan and Euclid avenues to optimize and increase street parking. Drop off zones are provided near building entrances. Pedestrian access would be provided through common plaza areas and perimeter sidewalks enhanced with landscaping.

Existing sidewalks would be maintained on both sides of the street and additional improvements would be constructed to improve pedestrian facilities adjacent to the project. These improvements include constructing high visibility crosswalks along Euclid Avenue at O’Connor Street and O’Keefe Street and bulb-outs for the north leg of the intersection of Euclid Avenue and O’Connor Street. The project would provide a highvisibility crosswalk with appropriate traffic calming measures at the intersection of O'Connor Street and Manhattan Avenue to connect the project to the University Circle complex, to facilitate greater neighborhood connection and to provide a convenient path for nearby residents to access the future University Avenue pedestrian and bike overpass. The project would also include bicycle parking for residents, employees, and customers.

Landscaping, Open Space, and Tree Protection and Removal The project is proposing a combination of Common Open Space, Private Open Space and Publicly Accessible Open Space. Common Open Space is shared area for the use of residents and guests, while Private Open Space includes enclosed areas adjoining individual units reserved for the exclusive private use of residents (such as balconies, decks, porches, etc.). The project will provide 13,807 square feet of private open space and 47,233 square feet of common open space. In addition, a 9,300 square-foot park would be located at the southwest corner of the project site, which would be publicly accessible, but owned, operated, and maintained by the applicant. The applicant will dedicate a public access easement over the park to the City or enter into a license agreement to provide public access.

Landscaping within the site plan and along perimeter streets would consist of trees, groundcovers, perennials, and shrubs. Tree species include white ash, marina strawberry, blue oak, red push pistache, kindred spirit oak and ironwood. 40 existing trees would be preserved on the project site, and 26 trees are proposed for removal, 21 of which are protected. Protected trees proposed for removal fall within proposed building footprint and infrastructure improvement areas. 42 new trees are proposed to be planted as part of the project’s landscaping plan. New trees would be 24” box size specimens.

Tree removal was analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report. The threshold for protected trees and replacement tree standards would remain the same under the City’s new Tree Protection Ordinance, which takes effect October 1, 2022.

Water Storage Tank
The City has sufficient water supply to serve the project, however, a 1.5-million-gallon steel water storage tank located at 375 Donohoe Street would be constructed concurrent with the project to improve fire flow and pressure to the project, as well as the extended City system. The tank and related infrastructure and points of connection would be funded and constructed by the applicant. This tank and related pump infrastructure would tie into the existing water system to service the project and improve water system performance City-wide as a public benefit. Connections for service to the project currently exist within public rights of way and would be upgraded as necessary to service the project’s demands. Several new points of connection will be required to existing infrastructure in Euclid Avenue, Manhattan Avenue, O’Connor Street and West Bayshore Road. Construction would include installation of a 14-inch water main from the tank site, continuing within Donohoe Street and West Bayshore Road, ultimately connecting to upsized 12-inch mains that surround the project site. The project would install 1,090 linear feet of new or upsized 14-inch pipe, and 1,700 feet of upsized 12- inch pipe.

Applicant Community Outreach Meetings
The applicant implemented a robust community outreach plan, including a website and newsletter to regularly communicate with residents and the public. The applicant held 32 community meetings, information booths, and small group listening sessions prior to submittal of the proposed project application as well as five additional community meetings and information sessions following application submission. The applicant also has a community newsletter and a separate project website (nodisplacement.com) which allows the community to view project updates, including a video update shared during the pandemic and a recorded Zoom community meeting, and the project team’s contact information for comments, questions, and suggestions. Community feedback focused on displacement prevention, relocation, housing stability, parking/mobility, safety, community change, neighborhood beautification, project amenities, public open space, and street design.

June 27, 2022 Planning Commission Policy and Action Meeting Staff gave a presentation on the Project as a Policy and Action Item at the June 27, 2022 Planning Commission Meeting to provide the Commission with a preview of the project and learn what information would be helpful to Commissioners moving towards a decision-making meeting. The Commission discussed the following topics:
• Water Tank. The Commission asked the Applicant and staff to post public notice signage at the water tank site and to provide more information and graphics depicting the 1.5-million-gallon tank. The Applicant posted signage at the site for subsequent meetings. Updated site plans and renderings are included with the revised plans.

Notices were mailed to all residents and property owners within 600 feet of the water tank site for subsequent meetings. Staff clarified at the meeting that the water tank will not connect to the aquifer. The tank would be 90 feet in diameter and would be 32 feet in height. Mitigation Measure AES-2.2 requires landscape screening of the water tank with native, taller species or trees to provide a visually appealing screen as viewed from the roadway and surrounding land uses after construction, as well as construction screening.
• Relocation Benefits. The Commission asked who was eligible for relocation benefits and what would occur if a tenant with a growing family needed a larger unit. o Eligibility. Three groups of tenants are eligible to move into a right of return unit after the Project has been constructed:
 Existing tenants who have participated in the Applicant’s early move program. These tenants have chosen to move out of the Euclid Improvements area early to other units in the Woodland Park Community.  Existing tenants who have not moved out of the Euclid Improvements area.
 Tenants who moved out of the Euclid Improvements area between the date Woodland Park announced the Euclid Improvements (December 2018) and date Woodland Park sent the final, signed relocation commitments to all affected households (October 2019). There are 8 households in this situation, and the extension of the right of return apartment to those households has been made in response to Council’s requests and to protect against the possibility that a household that vacated due to incomplete information would be prevented from long-term residency in East Palo Alto.
o Unit size. Units are required to be comparable in size in terms of square footage and in the number of bedrooms. While the applicant indicated a willingness to work with tenants if a larger unit was needed, those units would not be guaranteed at a below-market rent.
• Height and intensity of proposed development. The Commission discussed the buildings’ height and intensity and its impact on the existing neighborhood character.

The Applicant responded noting that the taller buildings are intentionally located closer to US 101 and the University Circle campus and that the tallest building is equal in height to the Four Seasons Hotel. The smaller five-story building is located to provide a transition in height down to the surrounding residential area.

July 25, 2022 Planning Commission Public Hearing
The Planning Commission adopted a resolution (Attachment R) recommending approval of the project and its entitlements at the July 25, 2022, Public Hearing (Ayes: 4; Noes: 2; Absent: 1; Abstain: 1). The Commission discussed the following topics:
• Parking and Traffic. The Commission discussed parking and traffic as major areas of concern. The Applicant’s Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan will be subject to Condition of Approval 29, which requires approval prior to building permit issuance. As described below, the Applicant’s TDM Plan includes reduced parking as a TDM measure (1.1 spaces per residential unit), and the Applicant’s parking study showed that the proposed parking supply will meet residential parking demand even before implementation of other TDM measures. In addition, the project will make a fair share contribution to intersection improvements that would improve the intersection operations to an acceptable Level of Service (LOS) function or otherwise improve preproject conditions. The Commission was also concerned about the potential loss of onstreet parking. The commission also discussed a permit parking program to better regulate street parking.
• Construction Impacts. The Commission discussed construction impacts to the neighborhood, especially focusing on air quality and asthma, as well as other public health outcomes. The project’s operational and construction impacts on Air Quality were analyzed under the project’s EIR and were found to be less than significant with mitigation. The project’s Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program includes measures and conditions of approval requiring management of construction dust, construction equipment requirements to lessen air pollution, and noise control measures. These measures have been included as Conditions of Approval.

Public comments were made at the hearing regarding the following topics:
• Water tank information availability and safety
• Parking issues in neighborhood
• Support for additional housing with expansion of rent controlled units and incomerestricted affordable units • Support for project’s transportation and climate benefits and lower parking ratio than County average
• Ensuring strong labor standards and apprenticeships
• Tenant comments supporting project approval due to new/improved housing units, employment for the community, and aesthetic improvements Written public comments submitted prior to or during the Planning Commission meeting are included as Attachment Q.

Analysis
General Plan and Development Code Amendments
The project includes an amendment to the Development Code and General Plan to create a Neighborhood Center Overlay (NCO) designation to increase density and building heights beyond the currently allowed standards in the High Density Residential (HDR) and Urban Residential (UR) land use designations for the Project site. Amendments to the Development Code and General Plan are provided in full in Attachments D and E. The NCO Zone would be available to projects in the Westside Area on a project-by-project basis. Any application for a zone change requires approval by City Council and consistency with the Westside Area Plan prerequisites and policies described below.

The NCO designation would support development of higher density housing and encourage mid-rise and high-rise residential development with neighborhood-serving commercial and community uses at the ground floor. Permitted uses would be the same as those in the R-HD and R-UHD zoning districts, with the addition of neighborhood service uses at the ground floor as a permitted use rather than a conditionally permitted use.

Table 4 provides a comparison of the existing zoning districts to the proposed overlay zone, as well as the proposed project’s development standards.

TABLE 4: Existing and Proposed Zoning Comparison
Development
Standard R-HD-5 R-UHD
Applicant’s
Proposed
NCO Zone
Proposed
Project
Staff
Recommended
Changes to
NCO Zone
Maximum
Density 44 du/acre 86 du/acre 180 du/acre 175 du/acre 175 du/acre TABLE 4: Existing and Proposed Zoning Comparison
Development
Standard R-HD-5 R-UHD
Applicant’s
Proposed
NCO Zone
Proposed
Project
Staff
Recommended
Changes to
NCO Zone
Setbacks
Front 15 feet 20 feet 5 feet 9-12 feet
Side/Street
Side
10 feet/15
feet
10 feet/15
feet 5 feet 10-85 feet
Rear 20 feet 20 feet 5 feet 10-20 feet 10 feet
Rear
Adjoining
R-LD or RMD
Zone
N/A (Does not
adjoin R-LD or
R-MD)
20 feet
Height
5 stories or
50 feet,
whichever
is greater
7 stories or
75 feet,
whichever is
greater
15 stories or
135 feet,
whichever is
greater
Bldg. 1: 9-13
stories/ 88-130
feet
Bldg. 2: 13
stories/ 135
feet
Bldg. 3: 5
stories/ 55 feet
13 stories or
140 feet,
whichever is
greater
Common/
Private Open
Space
150 sf/unit 100 sf/unit 100 sf/unit 100 sf/unit
Parking
1 space per studio unit

1.5 spaces per 1-bedroom
unit

1.8 spaces per 2-bedroom
unit
2 spaces per 3 to 4-
bedroom unit
1 space per
unit
1 space per
unit
Per Chapter

18.30 unless
modified by a
TDM plan, as
set forth in
Section

18.30.100, or
Conditional Use
Permit
As shown in the last column of Table 4 above, staff made several modifications to the applicant’s proposed amendments within the General Plan and Development Code Amendments to reduce intensity and increase context-sensitivity for future development applications seeking the NCO Zone. Those changes include:
• Reducing the maximum residential density from 180 dwelling units per acre to 175 dwelling units per acre;
• Increasing the rear setback to 10 feet;
• Adding an increased rear setback requirement of 20 feet for projects with rear yards adjacent to residential low density or medium density zones; • Reducing the height limit as measured in stories from 15 to 13 stories; and • Requiring that future projects either comply with the Development Code’s existing offstreet parking requirements or request parking reductions through TDM Plan modifications to requirements or through Conditional Use Permits.

Even with those changes, the proposed NCO Zone would increase intensity of development on the project site compared to existing regulations. The Westside Area Plan sets forth a process and requirements for projects that request increases in intensity above existing general plan and zoning regulations, as described below.

Westside Area Plan Consistency with Policies for Increasing Intensity The Westside Area Plan (WSAP) provides prerequisites and a process for new developments that increase intensity over allowed zoning in Policies 5.2-5.5. Further general plan consistency analysis is included in Attachment P.

WSAP Policy 5.2
WSAP Policy 5.2 states development projects proposing increases in intensity “must undergo a rigorous public process and meet the anti-displacement goals of this Chapter and all other applicable City policies and regulations.” The project has undergone a rigorous public process to date with over 12 public meetings, in addition to applicant-led community outreach prior to entitlement hearings. The tenant relocation plan and right of return for existing tenants meet the WSAP’s anti-displacement goals.

WSAP Policy 5.3
WSAP Policy 5.3 sets forth the following prerequisites:
• Prevents displacement of existing residents.

The project would provide right of return units as well as temporary units for all existing residents at consistent sizes and rents. The applicant will provide an anti-displacement incentive in the form of a rent rebate for all tenants who move into their right of return units.
• Provides for some income-restricted affordable housing.

The project would provide income-restricted affordable housing for households earning 35 to 60 percent of area median income (AMI) at an offsite location and provide an inlieu fee payment for any units constructed less than 89 units. • Preserves “right of return” for existing residents.

The project would preserve right of return for existing residents consistent with the requirements of the Westside Area Plan.
• Maintains the City’s rent stabilization program.

The project would construct 160 rent-controlled units, replacing demolished rentcontrolled units on a one-for-one basis. (There are 161 units proposed for demolition on the project site, one of which is a single-family home not subject to rent control.) • Includes new parks and open spaces or contributes to the provision of new parks and open spaces if it is a single project.

The project includes a new publicly accessible 9,300-square foot park. • Improves streets and infrastructure or contributes to the provision of new streets and infrastructure if it is a single project.

The project includes a water tank to improve fire flow and pressure to the project as well as the extended City system. The final details, materials, and design of the tank would be subject to future approval by the City. Street landscaping improvements and bus shelter improvements also are included.
• Improves the fiscal health of the City.

A fiscal impact analysis showed the project would have a positive net impact on the City of East Palo Alto’s General Fund, resulting in an estimated $1,109,000 in annual General Fund revenues in excess of the estimated annual General Fund expenditures. • Beautifies the area.

The project would add street trees, renovate streets to add additional parking spaces, replace aging structures with new high-quality buildings, and add parks and open space, consistent with the Westside Area Plan.

WSAP Policy 5.4
WSAP Policy 5.4 Sets forth the development process for increased intensities as follows:
• For areas on the north side of University Avenue or south of Clark Avenue to San Francisquito Creek, proposed increases in intensity over the currently allowed zoning intensity may be approved on a project-by-project basis. These projects shall be required to meet the policies set forth in this document in addition to any other city policies and shall be required to enter into a development agreement and/or pay fees to support the development of new parks, open spaces, infrastructure and community facilities necessary to support a higher level of development on the Westside.

The project is located on the north side of University Avenue and is in the “project-byproject” basis category, as listed on WSAP Figure 11-12 below. The proposed NCO zoning district would be applied for on a project-by-project basis, and any new development seeking to apply this zone to a site would be required to meet the requirements of the Westside Area Plan and other City policies and receive City Council approval. An analysis of the project’s consistency with the General Plan is presented in Attachment P.

WSAP Policy 5.5
WSAP Policy 5.5 sets forth the following application requirements for projects requesting increased intensities. These requirements have also been incorporated into the proposed Development Code Amendment as required findings in the NCO Zone:
• Proposed general plan and zoning for each parcel, including uses, building heights, and maximum development intensities.

The general plan designation and zoning for each parcel would be the current designation or district with the NCO suffix to indicate the NCO overlay zone which has a maximum building height of 13 stories or 140 feet.
• Development program that identifies parcel-by-parcel information on existing and proposed uses.

Sheet A100 of the project plans (Attachment I) includes parcel by parcel information on existing uses and sheet A101 identifies proposed uses.
• Affordable housing plan, including the amount, levels of affordability and location of each housing unit.

The project’s affordable housing plan is included in Section 4.5 of the Development Agreement. The project will meet the City’s Inclusionary Housing ordinance through provision off-site affordable housing and alternative compliance, as described below, and 160 units will be rent controlled at the project site. • Relocation plan for existing tenants that incorporates policies 5.10, 5.11, and 5.12 of this chapter.

The project includes a tenant relocation plan that addresses policies 5.10, 5.11, and

5.12 of the Westside Area Plan by providing existing tenants with the right of return to a unit of the same size and affordability, providing temporary housing, and providing moving and relocation services at no cost to the tenant. The application also includes a housing and neighborhood amenities, consistent with policy 5.12. • Fiscal impact analysis for the City
The fiscal impact analysis is included in Attachment M and described below. • Description and analysis of how the City’s rent stabilization program may be continued in the future, including sources of funding.

The Rent Stabilization Program is funded by annual registration fees paid on a per-unit basis on each rent-stabilized unit in the City. The project would replace every rentcontrolled unit on a one-for-one basis to ensure the ongoing viability of the Rent Stabilization Program and sustain the Rent Stabilization Program’s funding at its existing level. By maintaining the scope of the program and its funding source, the Euclid Improvements proposal would help sustain the program. • Park and open space plan, including the number, acres and locations of new parks and open spaces (or contribution to parks and open spaces for singleparcel projects).

The project will provide a new 9,300 square foot publicly accessible park. • A water supply assessment with guarantees of long-term water availability and new sources of water.

The applicant provided a water supply assessment, and long-term water availability was also evaluated in the Environmental Impact Report. The EIR found that the project would have sufficient supplies through all water years. The off-site water tank would improve water system storage and fire flow.
• Infrastructure improvement plan, including detailed information on all infrastructure and utilities (or contribution to Westside infrastructure improvements).

The project includes upgrades to storm drain lines, a new 1.5-million-gallon water tank, streetscape, sidewalks, and bike and pedestrian infrastructure. Plan sheets C.2 and C.4 include details on these improvements.
• Street network plan, including proposed street cross sections.

No new streets are proposed as part of the project.
• Community Impact Report that details how the project applicant will satisfy the prerequisites for increases in intensity or change in use in Policy 5.3.

The applicant’s community impact report is included as Attachment N. As described above, the project meets the prerequisites for increases in intensity or changes in use. • Community involvement strategy.

The applicant’s community involvement strategy is included as Attachment O and includes bilingual community engagement around relocation commitments and project design since 2017.
• Any additional information and level of detail requested by the City to ensure that the proposed project meets the vision of the community.

Site Design and Architectural Standards
The project has been designed to comply with the proposed NCO development standards as well as with the existing Site Design and Architectural Standards for Multiple-Family Residential Zones, set forth by EPAMC Section 18.10.040(D), as described below. Please see Attachment I for a copy of the architectural drawings submitted for the Project.

The main entries to the multiple-family development are clearly delineated and identifiable and are easily accessible for pedestrians from the public street. Individual entries to townhouse units are accessible from the street or enclosed corridors are provided for units on upper levels. Parking is consolidated into one garage to minimize driveways conflicting with pedestrian circulation and optimize on street parking. The building is designed to wrap the parking garage, which minimizes the visual impact of the project’s parking area. Driveways and drive aisles meet or exceed the minimum width required by EPAMC Section 18.30.090, and circulation is provided for both vehicles and pedestrians throughout the site. The Project also provides a combination of private and common usable open space.

The greater height and density of the development is oriented towards the University Circle Complex and US 101, with the smaller scale Building 3 transitioning into the neighborhood’s existing development. The architectural design features contrasts in building sizes and shapes. The taller high-rise structures of Building 2 have a more modern appearance with smoother textures, more steel and glass, cement board, lighter colors, and more vertical design elements. The lower-height residential buildings incorporate warmer, darker colors and richer textures including textured concrete with vine cover, vertical wood siding, brick veneers and painted perforated metal screening.

The facades are articulated, with recesses for courtyards, and blank walls are avoided along public rights-of-way. The roof design is compatible with the building’s modern style, and roof-mounted mechanical equipment is screened from view from public rightsof-way and adjacent properties by materials architecturally compatible with the structure they serve.

The landscaping plans include planting 42 24-inch box replacement trees and complete re-landscaping of the project site’s frontage on Manhattan Avenue, Euclid Avenue, O’Connor Street, and West Bayshore Road.

Tentative Parcel Map
The application for the proposed project includes a Tentative Parcel Map, which would merge the nine parcels on the east side of Euclid Avenue into one parcel and the five parcels on the west side of Euclid Avenue into a second parcel. The Tentative Parcel Map would dedicate additional right of way to the City that was previously under private ownership, since under current conditions parcel lines for some parcels extent to street centerlines along O’Connor Street and Euclid Avenue.

Parking Analysis
Per EPAMC Section 18.30.100, off-street parking requirements can be modified by a project’s TDM Plan. The applicant provided an analysis of parking demand with the TDM plan (Attachment J), which found the amount of parking provided (625 spaces) exceeds parking demand (592 spaces) from the residential portion of the proposed project and the non-residential parking demand would be satisfied by on-street parking.

The City’s consultant has peer reviewed and verified this study.

Utility Service and Improvements
Fire Water Pressure
As described above, the project includes the construction of a 1.5-million-gallon water tank and pump station to serve both the project site and to improve water system performance City-wide as a public benefit. As shown on Sheet WT-001 of Attachment I, the water tank would be approximately 90 feet in diameter and 32 feet in height. As required by Mitigation Measure AES-2.2, the tank is required to be screened both during construction and operation. The operational screening must be a combination of fencing and vegetation to soften and screen the appearance of the water tank and related improvements, with native, taller species or trees to provide a visually appealing screen as viewed from the roadway and surrounding land uses.

The final tank design, materials, and landscape screening will be subject to future approval by the City and Menlo Park Fire as set forth in Conditions of Approval 25 and 69.

Sanitary Sewer
The East Palo Alto Sanitary District (EPASD) stated the sanitary sewer conveyance system (e.g., sanitary sewer pipes and pump stations) downstream of the project site does not have capacity to handle flows from additional development. The applicant will be required to obtain all required permits including a Will Serve letter from the EPASD prior to the issuance of a building permit. As described below, EIR Mitigation Measure UTIL-3.1 requires that the project make a fair share contribution for 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 to adequately serve the site’s sanitary sewer demand.

Affordable Housing and Tenant Relocation Benefits
Affordable Housing
The project will provide both 160 on-site rent-controlled units, as well as up to 89 off-site income restricted units to comply with the City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance through alternative compliance, as described by EPAMC Section 18.37.080. For alternative compliance options, the inclusionary housing requirement is increased from 20% to 25% of net new units (111.25 units for this project). However, section 18.37.080(D) states that a developer may propose a different alternative compliance option, which the approval body may approve if the alternative compliance will provide greater public benefit than would provision of the inclusionary units on-site. The Development Agreement Ordinance (Attachment H) includes this required finding, which can be made due to the preservation of on-site rent-controlled units and the provision of off-site income-restricted units.

The applicant’s proposal includes construction of 70 to 89 affordable housing units (89 units is 20% of the 444 net new units) by an affordable housing developer at an off-site location. The Applicant will donate the land for the Off-Site Affordable Units to an affordable housing developer and provide gap financing. A per unit in-lieu fee payment would be made to the City if less than 89 affordable housing units are constructed at the off-site location. The project would replace the site’s existing rent-controlled units on a one-for-one basis, including a total of 160 rent-controlled units in the proposed project. Some of the rent-controlled units would serve as right of return units for existing tenants (see discussion below).

The Applicant proposes the combination of rent-controlled units on site, which would provide housing security for new and existing tenants, in addition to off-site affordable units to meet the required finding of achieving a greater public benefit than on-site inclusionary housing, as described by EPAMC 18.27.080. The Development Agreement (see Section 4.5) includes both the Affordable Housing Plan and the Inclusionary Housing Plan.

Tenant Relocation Plan
The Applicant’s Relocation Plan was reviewed by City Council at its November 30, 2021, and February 15, 2022, meetings; it was revised according to City Council feedback. The resolution approving the project (Attachment G) includes Council approval of the Relocation Plan.

Per the Applicant’s Plan (Attachment K), all current tenants will have three options:

1. Remain at Woodland Park in a Temporary Apartment with Right of Return. The applicant will provide another unit in the neighborhood for the tenant, and the tenant will have the right to return to a newly constructed unit at the project site.

2. Move Elsewhere with Right of Return. The tenant may find temporary housing independently and retain the right to return to a newly constructed unit at the project site.

3. Move Elsewhere, Waive Right of Return, and Receive Relocation Payment. The tenant can choose to waive the right of return and receive a relocation payment. Tenants who select this option will still have access to the moving assistance options described below.

Rent levels, off-street parking spaces, and number of bedrooms would be consistent among Existing Apartments, Temporary Apartments, and Right of Return Apartments provided by the applicant.1 Temporary Apartments would be located within one mile of Existing Apartments.

Tenants will have three choices regarding moving options:

1. Woodland Park will pay for and arrange moves within East Palo Alto. The services of a licensed mover will be provided at no cost. The licensed mover will be insured and will use its own boxes to pack and move all of the tenant’s belongings.

2. Tenant can arrange for and pay a mover. Woodland Park will reimburse the tenant’s actual moving costs up to the amount of $3,303.61 when the tenant provides receipts for the moving expense. (Amount subject to CPI increase.)
1 Existing Apartment: one of the 160 existing rent-controlled apartments within the Euclid Improvements Area; Temporary Apartment: interim existing apartment in move in condition within one mile of the Euclid Improvements Area; Right of Return Apartment:
newly constructed rent-stabilized unit within the new development project at the Euclid Improvements Area

3. Tenants may move themselves and receive a moving assistance payment of $1,982.16. (Subject to CPI increase.)
In addition to City requirements and in response to Council feedback, the applicant will:
• Provide a $1,000 anti-displacement incentive in the form of a rent rebate or housing goods voucher for tenants who move into to Right of Return units; and • Offer Right of Return units to tenants who moved out of the Euclid Improvements area between the date Woodland Park announced the Euclid Improvements (December 2018) and date Woodland Park sent the final, signed relocation commitments to all affected households (October 2019) to ensure that no displacement occurred due to a lack of awareness of relocation benefits.

Economic Impact
Upfront Obligations Associated with Development of the Project The Project will be required to pay all related Development Impact Fees, as shown in Table 5. Many of these Fees are paid directly to the City of East Palo Alto, but there are other impact fees that are paid directly to other taxing entities. Impact Fees for other taxing entities are not included in Table 5 below and include School Impact Fees and Sanitary District Impact Fees. School impact fees are estimated to be over $1.5 million for the proposed project. The East Palo Alto Sanitary District (EPASD) is in the process of adopting new impact fees as of the writing of this report, which are estimated at over $7 million for the proposed project based on a fee set forth in an EPASD staff report published for the August 30, 2022 board meeting.

TABLE 5: Estimated Development Impact Fees and In-lieu Fees for the Project Fee Category Estimated Fee
Inclusionary Housing In-lieu Feea $3,626,000
Parks/Trails $1,446,106
Public Facilities $2,536,118
Storm Drainage $311,417
Water Capacity Fee $2,539,494
Transportation Impact Fee $938,926
Intersection Improvement Fair Share Contribution $159,613 Total Local Impact Fees $11,557,674
a. Based on assumption that off-site affordable housing project will include 75 units Additionally, the Applicant will apply for fee credits, which would reduce the fee amounts by providing physical improvements, as permitted by the Municipal Code, as follows:
• a credit against the water capacity fee and public facility fee for the water tank and pump station
• a credit against the storm drainage fee for the cost of storm drainage infrastructure improvements to reduce storm water impacts and discharge rates • a credit against transportation impact fee for specific streetscape or frontage improvements, including on-street parking that increases the number of on-street stalls beyond what would be provided with parallel parking, bike lanes, and other transportation infrastructure, above City standards
• a credit against parks and trails fees for the cost of constructing the Park Space The credit amounts will be determined closer to Building Permit issuance.

Annual Obligations and Fiscal Impact Analysis
The Fiscal Impact Analysis (see Attachment M), prepared by the Applicant’s consultant Economics and Planning Systems (EPS) and peer-reviewed by the City’s consultant Keyser Marston Associates, concludes the proposed Project is projected to have a positive net impact on the City of East Palo Alto’s General Fund, resulting in an estimated $ 1,109,000 in annual General Fund revenues in excess of the estimated annual General Fund expenditures required for the City to provide services to the project. This analysis included the offsite affordable housing project component.

Development Agreement and Community Benefits
The application for the proposed project includes a Development Agreement. The Development Agreement process is regulated by EPAMC Chapter 18.108. A Development Agreement is a voluntary contract between a local jurisdiction and property owner that details obligations of both parties, specifies standards and conditions that will govern development of property, locks in current City land use regulations for a set time, and can be used to negotiate community benefits. The proposed Development Agreement is for a term of seven years with automatic extension of five years if the applicant submits a complete application for a building permit within the seven-year term; it also outlines the project’s Community Benefits.

Community Benefits are added value a developer provides to the City beyond what is required by City codes, policies, regulations and the master fee schedule. Westside Area Plan Policy 5.4 specifically requires applicants requesting increases in intensity to enter into a development agreement and/or pay fees to support the development of new parks, open spaces, infrastructure and community facilities necessary to support a higher level of development on the Westside.

The Applicant proposes material and beneficial Community Benefits discussed in Table 6 below that are incorporated into the Development Agreement. As described above, the Applicant intends to apply for credits to impact fees for some items that are considered community benefits. The last column in Table 6 describes the interaction between the fee credit and community benefit.

TABLE 6: Proposed Community Benefits
Item Description Fee Credit Relationship
New public
park
The applicant will provide a new 9,300 square
foot park, which will be available for use by the
public free of charge in perpetuity between 8:00
a.m. and sunset. The applicant will be
responsible for maintenance of the park, and
the public’s right to access the park will be
formalized through the dedication of a public
access easement or execution of a license
agreement.

Fee credit: The cost of
constructing the Park Space
will be credited against the
Project’s required parks and
trails development impact
fees.

Community Benefit: Public
access easement (or license)
over the Park Space, as well
as the Developer's obligation
to maintain the Park Space
TABLE 6: Proposed Community Benefits
Item Description Fee Credit Relationship
Community
Function
Space
The applicant will pay for, construct, and
maintain an approximately 2,500 square-foot
Community Function Space as a multi-use
space appropriate for City functions or events,
and for community groups to use for meetings,
events, educational purposes, cultural
celebrations, and similar gatherings. The
Community Function Space shall be built out to
include finished flooring, drop down or open
concept ceilings, bathroom for the exclusive
use of guests of the community room, audio
and visual equipment, furniture, fixtures and
equipment, and other features appropriate for
the purpose of the space. The Community
Function Space will be available for use by the
community and City between the hours of 8am
and 10pm free of charge and community users
will have priority status to reserve the space
over building tenants when reservations are
made more than 10 days in advance of the use
of the community room.

None
Bus Stop
Improvements
Applicant will build a high-quality bus shelter,
including wind and rain screening and transit
schedule information, on O’Connor Street near
Euclid Ave. It is intended to be served by
SamTrans routes 81, 280, and 281 and
Ravenswood City School District school buses.

None
Water tank
and
infrastructure
Applicant will construct a 1.5 million gallon
water tank and pump system, in coordination
with City of East Palo Alto Public Works and
Menlo Fire District, to improve the overall water
conveyance, supply, and pressure in the
neighborhood. The tank, pump system and the
land will be transferred to the City.

Fee credit: A portion of this
new infrastructure will be
credited against the water
capacity fees and public
facilities fees
Community Benefit: The
cost incurred by the
Developer in excess of the
required water capacity fees
and public facilities fees are
considered a community
benefit
Storm
Drainage
Improvements
Applicant will build storm drainage
infrastructure improvements in the Projectadjacent street segments of Euclid Ave., O’Connor Street, Manhattan Ave, and/or West
Bayshore Ave consistent with the existing City
of East Palo Alto Storm Drain Master Plan to
reduce storm water impacts and discharge
rates, up to a maximum cost of $500,000
Fee credit: A portion of the
cost of constructing the storm
drainage improvements will
be credited against storm
drainage fees
Community Benefit: The
remaining value of the
improvement will be a
community benefit.

Dedication of
Roadway
Applicant will dedicate approximately 20,350
square feet (roughly ½ acre) of land to the City
of East Palo Alto, along the entire frontage of
O’Connor Street between Manhattan Ave and
None
TABLE 6: Proposed Community Benefits
Item Description Fee Credit Relationship
Euclid Ave, and a portion of the frontage of
Euclid Ave between O’Connor Street and West
Bayshore Road. This includes existing
roadway, sidewalk, and building-related open
space.

As described above, the Development Agreement is functioning as the Affordable and Inclusionary Housing Agreement for this project and includes specific requirements related to the development of the off-site affordable housing project (see Section 4.5).

The Development Agreement sets forth the following:
• Affordability levels: Sets the affordability levels for the off-site units (25% of such units available to and rented at rents affordable to 35% AMI households; 50% of such units available to and rented at rents affordable to Very Low Income Households up to 50% AMI; and 25% of such units available to and rented at rents affordable to Low Income Households (up to 60% AMI)). • Number of units: Sets forth the number of units (70-89) to be constructed on the off-site parcel and payment of the in-lieu fee to account for any units not constructed.
• Timing: The planning application for the off-site units must be submitted to the City prior to issuance of building permits for the principal Project, and building permits for the off-site units are required to be pulled at or before the City's issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the principal Project, or:
o Safety Net Units: If building permits have not been pulled for the off-site affordable units at the time of first Certificate of Occupancy for the principal Project, the Applicant is required to place affordability restrictions on existing vacant units in the developer's portfolio until the off-site affordable project is constructed. Households occupying these units would be transferred to the off-site affordable project after construction is complete.

For further information on the requirements associated with the safety net units, see Attachment L.

Required Findings
The Applicant is requesting a General Plan Amendment, Development Code Amendment, Design Review, Conditional Use Permit, and Tentative Map for the construction of a new mixed-use residential development. The required findings for each of these entitlements are noted below, and expanded analysis is presented in Attachment G.

Findings for General Plan Amendments (EPAMC Sec. 18.114.060(A)) • The amendment is internally consistent with all other provisions of the General Plan. • The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the City.
• The affected site is physically suitable in terms of design, location, operating characteristics, shape, size, topography, and the provision of public and emergency vehicle access, and public services and utilities and is served by highways and streets adequate in width and improvement to carry the kind and quantity of traffic the proposed use would likely generate, to ensure that the proposed use(s) and/or development will not endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the property or improvements in the vicinity in which the property is located.

Findings for Development Code and Zoning Map Amendments (EPAMC Sec. 18.114.060(B)) • The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan.
• The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the City.
• The proposed amendment is internally consistent with other applicable provisions of the Development Code.
• The affected site is physically suitable in terms of design, location, operating characteristics, shape, size, topography, and the provision of public and emergency vehicle access, and public services and utilities and is served by highways and streets adequate in width and improvement to carry the kind and quantity of traffic the proposed use would likely generate, to ensure that the proposed use(s) and/or development will not endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the property or improvements in the vicinity in which the property is located.

Neighborhood Center Overlay District Findings (EPAMC Sec. 18.11.050) (Proposed Development Code Amendment)
• The project does not displace existing residents.
• The project provides for some income-restricted affordable housing. • The project preserves “right of return” for existing residents if demolition of existing residential units is proposed.
• The project maintains the City’s rent stabilization program, where applicable. • The project contributes to the provision of new parks and open spaces. • The project contributes to the provision of new streets and infrastructure. • The project improves the fiscal health of the City.
• The project enhances the area for residents.

Design Review Findings (EPAMC Sec. 18.86.050(C))
• The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan and is in compliance with all applicable provisions of the Development Code and all other City ordinances and regulations.
• The proposed development is to be constructed on a suitable site, adequate in shape, size, topography, and other circumstances to accommodate the proposed development. • The proposed development complies with the applicable standards of review. • The proposed development is designed and arranged to provide adequate consideration to ensure the public health, safety, and general welfare, and to prevent adverse effects on neighboring property.

Conditional Use Permit Findings for the demolition of Affordable Dwelling Units (EPAMC Sec.

18.88.060(A))
• The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan. • The proposed use is allowed within the subject zone and complies with all other applicable provisions of the Development Code and the Municipal Code. • The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed use are compatible with the allowed uses in the vicinity, as detailed in the General Plan or any applicable Specific Plan.
• Operation of the use at the location proposed would not be detrimental to the harmonious and orderly growth of the City, or endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use. • The subject site is physically suitable in terms of design, location, operating characteristics, shape, size, topography, and the provision of public and emergency vehicle (e.g., fire and medical) access and public services and utilities; and served by highways and streets adequate in width and improvement to carry the kind and quantity of traffic the proposed use would likely generate.

Additional Findings for the demolition of Affordable Dwelling Units (EPAMC 18.48.220):
• The proposal will not be materially detrimental to the public interest of the affected neighborhood and the City.
• The proposal is consistent with the City's General Plan policies, Development Code requirements, and all other City rules and regulations. • Whether the project is necessary to permit construction of special needs facilities such as, but not limited to: childcare centers and affordable housing developments that serve the greater good of the entire community.

Tentative Map Findings (EPAMC Sec. 18.52.060)
• The proposed map, subdivision design, and improvements are consistent with the General Plan, any applicable specific plan, and this Article. • The site is physically suitable for the type and proposed density of development; • The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
• The design of the subdivision or type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health or safety problems.
• The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision.
o This finding may also be made if the Review Authority finds that alternate easements for access or use will be provided, and that they will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public.
o This finding shall apply only to easements of record, or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction, and no authority is hereby granted to the Review Authority to determine that the public at large has acquired easements of access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. • The discharge of sewage from the proposed subdivision into the community sewer system will not result in violation of existing requirements specified by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board.
• The design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, passive or natural heating and cooling opportunities.
• The proposed subdivision, its design, density, and type of development and improvements conforms to the regulations of the Development Code and the regulations of any public agency having jurisdiction by law.

Development Agreement Findings (18.108.030(D))
• The development agreement is in the best interests of the City. • The development agreement is consistent with the purpose, intent, goals, policies, programs, and land use designations of the General Plan, any applicable specific plan, and the Development Code.
• The development agreement will promote the public convenience, health, interest, safety and general welfare of the City.
• The project will be compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the zone in which the real property is located. • The project will not adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values.
• The project will further important Citywide goals and policies that have been officially recognized by the Council.
• The project will provide the City with important, tangible benefits beyond those that may be required by the City through project conditions of approval.

Environmental Review
The City of East Palo Alto is the lead agency for all California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) activities and is responsible for preparation of all studies/documents associated with environmental review of the Project.

The City published the Notice of Preparation for an EIR for the Project on April 22, 2020, and a Scoping Meeting was held before the Planning Commission on May 18, 2020. On July 1, 2021, the City issued a Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). Publication of the Notice of Availability began a forty-five (45) day public review period, which was extended to a 75-day review period, concluding September 15, 2021. During this period, a Planning Commission hearing to solicit comments on the DEIR was held on July 26, 2021 and the DEIR was available for review and comment to the community, local, State, federal agencies, and interested organizations.

A copy of the DEIR is available at:
https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/project/19555/wood land_park_euclid_improvements_deir_june_2021.pdf
CEQA Guidelines Appendix G sets forth a set of questions to answer to evaluate impacts to environmental resource areas. The DEIR found that all impacts would be mitigated to a lessthan-significant level with implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, with the exception of Aesthetics and Utilities and Service Systems, which would remain significant and unavoidable impacts. Mitigation measures were still applied to these topics to reduce the impacts as much as possible, as required by CEQA.

Resource areas requiring mitigation measures to reduce impacts to less-than-significant include Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Noise, Transportation, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Hazards and Hazardous Materials, as shown in Table 7 below. Resource areas listed as less-thansignificant or no impact do not require mitigation. Resource areas requiring mitigation are further described below.

TABLE 7: Resource Area Impact Summary
Less-than-Significant or No
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Significant and
Unavoidable Impact
TABLE 7: Resource Area Impact Summary
Less-than-Significant or No
Impact
Less-than-Significant
Impact with Mitigation
Significant and
Unavoidable Impact
Agricultural and Forestry
Resources Air Quality Aesthetics
Energy Biological Resources Utilities And Service
Systems
Hydrology and Water Quality Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
Land Use Geology and Soils
Mineral Resources Noise
Population and Housing Transportation
Public Services Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Recreation Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
Wildfire
Significant and Unavoidable Impacts:

Aesthetics
The EIR determined there would be a significant unavoidable impact for aesthetics. As described above, the project is proposing a new General Plan land use and zoning overlay (Neighborhood Center Residential Overlay, or NCO). This change in zoning would allow a substantial increase in density compared to the existing R-HD-5 (Multi Family High Density) and R-UHD (Multiple Family Urban High Density Residential) zoning, tripling the allowable density and nearly doubling the maximum building height. While the General Plan includes policies regarding design and development and the Municipal Code includes guidance on development, including required findings for approvals for design review, this project would introduce a new zoning and General Plan designation allowing a denser development very different than what currently is permitted and existing surrounding uses. The DEIR concluded that, even with design measures to improve the appearance of the project, the change in zoning allowing a larger building, by itself, would unavoidably modify the physical appearance and character of the immediate area. For this reason, the project would cause a significant unavoidable aesthetic impact.

Utilities and Service Systems
The second significant unavoidable impact is for utilities and service systems, specifically for sewer capacity. The DEIR conservatively uses the wastewater generation rates that are used by East Palo Alto Sanitary District (240 gallons per day per residence). There is ongoing discussion if such rates, which reflect more of a suburban land use pattern, are applicable to the denser apartment project constructed with low flow water fixtures. Using this conservative generation rate used in the Sanitary District’s modeling, the DEIR concluded the addition of the project’s flows to the system has the potential to stress the sewer system’s capacity. While the project applicant will be required to pay its fair share funding towards sanitary sewer systems improvements as a mitigation measure, the overall improvement will be implemented by the Sanitary Sewer District and not as part of this project. As such, until these improvements are constructed, the project’s effects on the existing system would be considered significant and unavoidable.

Less than Significant Impacts with Mitigation:

Air Quality
The project would implement mitigation measures to avoid impacts to air quality relating to construction dust and emissions from construction equipment. Construction activities, particularly during site preparation and grading, would temporarily generate fugitive dust. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) CEQA Air Quality Guidelines consider these impacts to be less than significant if best management practices, such as watering exposed surfaces, covering loose materials in haul trucks, and limiting vehicle speeds on unpaved surfaces, are implemented to reduce the emissions. A condition of approval would be implemented consistent with recommendations in the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines for providing best management practices to control construction emissions and would reduce onsite fugitive dust emissions sufficiently to result in a less than significant impact. Construction equipment and associated heavy-duty truck traffic generates diesel exhaust, a known Toxic Air Contaminant. Construction exhaust emissions pose health risks for sensitive receptors such as surrounding residents, and without implementation of mitigation measures, the project would exceed BAAQMD thresholds. A mitigation measure would be implemented requiring the applicant to use modernized equipment with engines that significantly reduce emissions of particulate matter (PM) and nitrogen oxides (NOx), which would reduce the impacts to sensitive receptors during project construction to less than significant.

Biological Resources
The project would implement a mitigation measure to avoid impacts to nesting migratory birds and reduce the potential for avian collision with the proposed office building. The mitigation measure includes conducting construction outside of nesting season or conducting nesting bird surveys, implementing buffer zones around active nests, and reporting results of surveys and required buffer zones prior to tree removal. With incorporation of these measures, the project would result in a less than significant impact to nesting birds.

Cultural Resources
Ground disturbing activities associated with project construction could disturb previously unrecorded archaeological resources or human remains due to ground disturbance associated with construction activities. Mitigation measures will be implemented to avoid or reduce impacts to due to inadvertent discovery of archaeological resources archaeological resources and/or human remains that may be present on the site, which includes work stoppage and tribal consultation if resources are discovered. These measures would reduce potential impacts to unrecorded archaeological resources at the site by identifying them prior to construction and developing alternative project designs, or treatment plans to avoid or minimize impacts to resources.

Geology and Soils
While the preliminary geotechnical report determined the project site to be geotechnically and geologically feasible for future development, the project site would still be subject to risks associated with local soils. A mitigation measure requiring a construction level geotechnical evaluation will be required and all standards and recommended engineering measures to mitigate for liquefaction, expansive soils and other local soil constraints must be incorporated into the project.

There are no major or unique paleontological resources known to exist in the city, and the likelihood of encountering unique paleontological resources is low. However, development of the project could result in the discovery and disturbance of previously unknown or undiscovered paleontological resources. To reduce this potential impact to unique paleontological resources to a less-than-significant level, a mitigation measure is included in case a paleontological resource is encountered during grading or excavation that requires stopping construction activities within 50 feet of the find and avoiding the resource or implementing a data recovery plan.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Unmitigated emissions from the development of up to 605 dwelling units and retail uses would potentially exceed the BAAQMD GHG threshold. Implementation of a mitigation measure would be required to reduce GHG emissions below BAAQMD GHG threshold. The mitigation measure requires the project Applicant to prepare a Commute Trip Reduction (CTR)/Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan to minimize vehicle trips and mobile emissions. TDM plan requirements include consultation with the local transit service provider on the need to provide infrastructure to connect the project with transit services and a TDM plan including, but not limited to, the following measures is required: ride-matching assistance, preferential carpool parking, flexible work schedules for carpools, half-time transportation coordinators, providing a web site or message board for coordinating rides, designating adequate passenger loading and unloading and waiting areas for ride-sharing vehicles, and including bicycle end of trip facilities.

Hazards and Hazardous Waste
During construction activities, such as demolition of the existing structures, there is a potential for asbestos from asbestos containing material areas and lead-based paint from painted surfaces to be exposed. However, the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations during construction, as required by the DTSC and California OES and to implement two mitigation measures, which require preparation and submittal of an Asbestos Operation and Management Plan and a Lead Based Paint and PCB Operation and Management Plan.

Noise
Noise from project construction and noise from project operation would be reduced to a less than significant impact with implementation of a mitigation measure requiring the following:
maintain and tune all proposed equipment in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations to minimize noise emission, fit all equipment with properly operating mufflers, air intake silencers, and engine shrouds, post a sign with a contact name and telephone number to respond in the event of a noise complaint, place stationary construction equipment and material delivery in loading and unloading areas as far as practicable from the residences, limit unnecessary engine idling, use smart back-up alarms or switch off back-up alarms and replace with human spotters, use low-noise emission equipment, limit use of public address systems, and minimize grade surface irregularities on construction sites.

Transportation and Circulation
The proposed driveway access to the parking garage on Manhattan Avenue may have limited sight distance for exiting vehicles onto Manhattan Avenue, resulting in a potential site design hazard from vehicles approaching from Bayshore Road. Implementation of a mitigation measure that the project applicant install traffic calming measures at the Bayshore Road/Manhattan Avenue location to reduce traffic speeds and improve the safety of driveway movements is required. 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 EIR
Following the conclusion of the public comment period, the City of East Palo Alto prepared a Final EIR in accordance with Section 15132 of the CEQA Guidelines. The Final EIR was published on July 15, 2022.

A copy of the FEIR is available at:
https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/project/19369/eucli d_feir_mmrp.pdf
Fifteen (15) public comment letters were received from individuals and agencies during the Draft EIR’s 75-day public review period, including the State Water Board, East Palo Alto Sanitation District, and Palo Alto Park Mutual Water Company. The comments centered on the following topics:
• Water storage tank use and impacts
• Sanitary District capacity
• Water supply
• Neighborhood infrastructure
• Proposed height
• Proposed density and intensity of use
• Parking demand and supply
• Entitlement and construction timing and duration
• Public Art
• Gentrification
• Traffic
• Water tank aesthetics
• Parks and open space
• Tenant relocation
• Refuse service and odor
• Geotechnical report
The Planning Commission also provided comments on the Draft EIR at the July 26, 2021 public meeting. Commissioners asked questions regarding population and housing impact thresholds, alternatives, the water tank’s height, purpose, and land ownership, sanitary system connections, traffic, and tree preservation.

All comments were responded to in the Final EIR (see Attachment C) and clarifying text revisions were made where necessary.

CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations When there are unmitigated significant and unavoidable environmental impacts associated with a project, the California Environmental Quality Act requires the decision-making agency to balance the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental impacts when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered acceptable. The City is required to state the specific reasons to support its action based on the final environmental impact report or other information in the record in a document is called a “Statement of Overriding Considerations” which is included in Attachment A. The City finds that the mitigation measures proposed to reduce significant impacts related to aesthetics and utilities and service systems cannot guarantee reduction of the impacts to a less-than-significant level. However, the City of East Palo Alto concludes that the project’s relative benefits outweigh its residual environmental effects for the following reasons:
• Consistency with Overall Vision of the General Plan and Westside Area Plan • Improved Housing Stock
• Economic Benefits to the City of East Palo Alto
• Affordable Housing and Community Benefits
MMRP
The MMRP identifies 15 mitigation measures and one standard condition related to Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Noise, and Transportation. Implementation of the MMRP will be monitored by City staff to ensure the potential impacts of the implementation of the Project is reduced in accordance with CEQA.

Traffic Analysis
With the passage of SB 743, effective July 1, 2020, amending CEQA’s evaluation of transportation impacts and the Guidelines implementing SB 743, a project’s effects on intersection function (referred to as level of service or LOS) is no longer considered an impact on the environment. However, the City of East Palo Alto has General Plan policies that address LOS as a planning or growth management matter, separate from the CEQA process.

In the event a deficient LOS condition is identified, the City has discretion whether to require a project to address the deficiency by implementing roadway or other transportation improvements in order to restore or improve the LOS.

Traffic conditions at 22 intersections in the project area were evaluated using LOS and compared to the City of East Palo Alto and the City of Menlo Park LOS standards. Of the 22 study intersections, nine currently operate with LOS deficiencies, and the project would have an adverse effect on the following six intersections during one or both peak hours under “existing plus project” conditions:
• University Avenue/Donohoe Street
• University Avenue/SB US-101 Ramps
• University Avenue/Woodland Avenue
• Woodland Avenue/University Circle
• Donohoe Street/NB US-101 On-Ramp
• Woodland Avenue/University Circle
The following recommended roadway improvements would improve the intersections to an acceptable LOS or otherwise improve pre-project conditions:
• University Avenue/Donohoe Street: Widen Donohoe Street to 4 through lanes in each direction. In addition, it is recommended that an exclusive southbound right-turn lane be constructed. (Recommended as part of the University Plaza Phase II Project) • University Avenue/Woodland Avenue: Construct a third eastbound left-turn lane and reconfigure westbound approach to consist of one left-turn, one through, and one rightturn lane. • Donohoe Street/NB US-101 On-Ramp: Signalize intersection (Recommended as part of the University Plaza Phase II Project)
• Donohoe Street/NB US-101 Off-Ramp: Widen Donohoe Street to 4 through lanes in each direction (Recommended as part of the University Plaza Phase II Project) The University Circle Phase II project will construct the third eastbound left-turn lane identified in the second bullet point above. The proposed improvement to widen Donohoe Street to 4 lanes in each direction would assist in relieving congestion along Donohoe Street and nearby intersections along University Avenue and Woodland Avenue. The applicant will be required to contribute funding to planned improvements being implemented at the Donohoe Street/Euclid Avenue intersection and the US 101 Northbound on-ramp as part of the University Plaza Phase II development, as well as City-planned improvements at Donohoe Street and University Avenue and at the US 101 northbound off ramp, based on a fair share formula based on the number of trips added by the project (see estimate above).

Transportation Demand Management Plan
On June 1, 2021, City Council adopted a resolution to repeal former Chapter 10.32 of the East Palo Alto Municipal Code and enact a new Chapter 10.32 establishing a transportation demand management (TDM) program. The new TDM provisions require residential developments approved after January 1, 2022, to achieve a forty percent (40%) reduction from baseline conditions in average daily trips and to submit a TDM plan that demonstrates how the project will achieve a 40 percent reduction in average daily trips. The proposed project would be subject to the new TDM requirements, and the Applicant’s proposed TDM plan is provided for review as Attachment J, and Condition of Approval 29 requires the applicant to receive approval of the TDM Plan from the City’s TDM Coordinator prior to issuance of building permits. The City has recently entered into contract with a TDM Program Coordinator. The City’s TDM Program Coordinator will review the TDM plan for compliance with the ordinance and program guidelines.

Public Comment
As of the writing of this report, four comment letters have been received and are included as Attachment S. The letters received express support for project approval due to its contribution towards increasing regional housing supply, improving affordable housing, spurring economic growth, promoting energy-efficient and environmental design and mobility options. Any other public comments received after publication of this report will be forwarded to the City Council upon receipt.

Next Steps
Should City Council choose to proceed with the recommended actions, the Ordinances approving the Development Agreement, amending the Development Code, and amending the Zoning Map will return to Council for a second reading at a following City Council Meeting.

Public Notice
Notice of the public hearing was mailed to property owners and occupants within 600- foot radius of the project site on August 26, 2022. A legal ad was placed in the local newspaper and published on August 26, 2022. The public was provided notice of this agenda on the City’s official bulletin board outside City Hall, and the agenda and report were made available on the City’s website. The project website was updated with meeting information.

In addition, notices were also mailed to state, local and regional agencies, and posted at the project site. Active non-profits and religious institutions in the Westside area and other interested parties were also mailed or emailed the meeting notice and Final EIR.

The applicant also conducted further public outreach and noticing, including a mailing to the Westside neighborhood.

Attachments
A. CEQA Resolution, Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program
B. Draft EIR
C. Final EIR
D. General Plan Amendment Resolution
E. Development Code Amendment Ordinance
F. Zoning Map Amendment Ordinance
G. Resolution Approving Project, Required Findings, and Conditions of Approval H. Ordinance Approving Development Agreement (with Development Agreement) I. Architectural Plans (click link here)
J. TDM Plan and Parking Analysis
K. Relocation Plan
L. Affordable Housing Alternative Compliance Milestones M. Fiscal Impact Analysis
N. Community Impact Report
O. Community Involvement Strategy
P. General Plan Consistency Analysis
Q. Planning Commission Meeting Public Comments
R. Planning Commission Resolution
S. City Council Meeting Public Comments