Agenda packet, first session — East Palo Alto City Council, December 3, 2024 (part 3 of 4)

Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc. with its permission.

Policy # 6803J079023
517

COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY
occupational therapist or occupational that is available to any of your "employees" therapy assistant, physical therapist or for "bodily injury" that arises out of providing speech-language pathologist; or or failing to provide "incidental medical services" to any person to the extent not (b) First aid or "Good Samaritan services" subject to Paragraph 2.a.(1) of Section II by any of your "employees" or "volunteer Who Is An Insured. workers", other than an employed or volunteer doctor. Any such "employees" K. MEDICAL PAYMENTS INCREASED LIMIT or "volunteer workers" providing or failing The following replaces Paragraph 7. of to provide first aid or "Good Samaritan SECTION III LIMITS OF INSURANCE: services" during their work hours for you will be deemed to be acting within the 7. Subject to Paragraph 5. above, the Medical scope of their employment by you or Expense Limit is the most we will pay under performing duties related to the conduct Coverage C for all medical expenses of your business. because of "bodily injury" sustained by any

3. The following replaces the last sentence of one person, and will be the higher of:

Paragraph 5. of SECTION III LIMITS OF a. $10,000; or
INSURANCE:
b. The amount shown in the Declarations of For the purposes of determining the this Coverage Part for Medical Expense
applicable Each Occurrence Limit, all related
Limit. acts or omissions committed in providing or
failing to provide "incidental medical L. AMENDMENT OF EXCESS INSURANCE services", first aid or "Good Samaritan CONDITION PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY services" to any one person will be deemed The following is added to Paragraph 4.b., to be one "occurrence".

Excess Insurance, of SECTION IV

4. The following exclusion is added to COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY Paragraph 2., Exclusions, of SECTION I CONDITIONS:

COVERAGES COVERAGE A BODILY
This insurance is excess over any of the other

INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE
insurance, whether primary, excess, contingent LIABILITY:
or on any other basis, that is Professional Sale Of Pharmaceuticals Liability or similar coverage, to the extent the
"Bodily injury" or "property damage" arising loss is not subject to the professional services out of the violation of a penal statute or exclusion of Coverage A or Coverage B. ordinance relating to the sale of M. BLANKET WAIVER OF SUBROGATION pharmaceuticals committed by, or with the WHEN REQUIRED BY WRITTEN CONTRACT knowledge or consent of the insured. OR AGREEMENT

5. The following is added to the DEFINITIONS
Section: The following is added to Paragraph 8., Transfer Of Rights Of Recovery Against Others To Us, "Incidental medical services" means: of SECTION IV COMMERCIAL GENERAL a. Medical, surgical, dental, laboratory, x- LIABILITY CONDITIONS:
ray or nursing service or treatment,
If the insured has agreed in a written contract or advice or instruction, or the related agreement to waive that insured's right of
furnishing of food or beverages; or
recovery against any person or organization, we b. The furnishing or dispensing of drugs or waive our right of recovery against such person medical, dental, or surgical supplies or or organization, but only for payments we make appliances. because of:

6. The following is added to Paragraph 4.b., a. "Bodily injury" or "property damage" that Excess Insurance, of SECTION IV occurs; or COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY
CONDITIONS: b. "Personal and advertising injury" caused by an offense that is committed; This insurance is excess over any valid and collectible other insurance, whether primary, subsequent to the signing of that contract or excess, contingent or on any other basis, agreement.

Policy #
6803J079023
518

ANY PERSON OR ORGANIZATION THAT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO INCLUDE AS

ADDITIONAL INSURED ON THE COVERAGE

FORM IN A WRITTEN CONTRACT OR

AGREEMENT THAT IS SIGNED AND

EXECUTED BY YOU BEFORE THE BODILY

INJURY OR PROPERTY DAMAGE

OCCURS AND THAT IS IN EFFECT
DURING THE POLICY PERIOD.

COMMERCIAL AUTO
POLICY NUMBER:

THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY.

DESIGNATED INSURED FOR

COVERED AUTOS LIABILITY COVERAGE
This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following:

AUTO DEALERS COVERAGE FORM

BUSINESS AUTO COVERAGE FORM

MOTOR CARRIER COVERAGE FORM
With respect to coverage provided by this endorsement, the provisions of the Coverage Form apply unless modified by this endorsement.

This endorsement identifies person(s) or organization(s) who are "insureds" for Covered Autos Liability Coverage under the Who Is An Insured provision of the Coverage Form. This endorsement does not alter coverage provided in the Coverage Form.

SCHEDULE
Name Of Person(s) Or Organization(s):

Information required to complete this Schedule, if not shown above, will be shown in the Declarations.

Each person or organization shown in the Schedule is ered Autos Liability Coverage in the Business Auto an "insured" for Covered Autos Liability Coverage, but and Motor Carrier Coverage Forms and Paragraph only to the extent that person or organization qualifies D.2. of Section I Covered Autos Coverages of the as an "insured" under the Who Is An Insured provi- Auto Dealers Coverage Form. sion contained in Paragraph A.1. of Section II CovCA 20 48 10 13 Insurance Services Office, Inc., 2011 Page 1 of 1 BA9R319577
519
520
Any person or organization that you agree in a written contract to include as an additional insured on this Coverage Part for "bodily injury" or "property damage" included in the products-completed operations hazard, provided that such contract was signed by you before, and is in effect when, the "bodily injury or "property damage" occurs.

Any project to which a written contract with the Additional Insured Person(s) or Organization(s) in the Schedule applies.
521

COMMERCIAL AUTO
THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY.

BLANKET WAIVER OF SUBROGATION
This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following:

AUTO DEALERS COVERAGE FORM

BUSINESS AUTO COVERAGE FORM

MOTOR CARRIER COVERAGE FORM
The following replaces Paragraph A.5., Transfer of required of you by a written contract executed Rights Of Recovery Against Others To Us, of the prior to any "accident" or "loss", provided that the CONDITIONS Section: "accident" or "loss" arises out of the operations

5. Transfer Of Rights Of Recovery Against Oth- contemplated by such contract. The waiver apers To Us plies only to the person or organization desigWe waive nated in such contract. any right of recovery we may have against any person or organization to the extent
CA T3 40 02 15 © 2015 The Travelers Indemnity Company. All rights reserved. Page 1 of 1 Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc. with its permission.

Policy #
BA9R319577
522
THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY.

Countersigned by
Authorized Representative
Form WC 04 03 06 (1) Printed in U.S.A.

Policy Expiration Date:

WAIVER OF OUR RIGHT TO RECOVER FROM

OTHERS ENDORSEMENT - CALIFORNIA
Policy Number: Endorsement Number:

Effective Date: Effective hour is the same as stated on the Information Page of the policy.

Named Insured and Address:

We have the right to recover our payments from anyone liable for an injury covered by this policy. We will not enforce our right against the person or organization named in the Schedule. (This agreement applies only to the extent that you perform work under a written contract that requires you to obtain this agreement from us.) You must maintain payroll records accurately segregating the remuneration of your employees while engaged in the work described in the Schedule.

The additional premium for this endorsement shall be 2 % of the California workers' compensation premium otherwise due on such remuneration.

SCHEDULE
Person or Organization Job Description
Any person or organization from whom you are required by written contract or agreement to obtain this waiver of rights from us
57WEGAD5TM3 07/14/2024
Raimi & Associates, Inc.
1900 Addison Street Suite 200
Berkeley, CA 94704
07/14/2025
523

 

   
 

 
       


      
      
       
      

      

                
 
      




     
           
      
       
      


Policy #: BA9R319577
524
Raimi + Associates 40 East Palo Alto Strategic Priorities and Workplan Proposal Appendix A: Resumes
525
www.raimiassociates.com

MATT RAIMI, AICP

PRINCIPAL
Matt Raimi, the founder of Raimi + Associates, has over 20 years of experience in planning across the country. He has directed numerous comprehensive plans, specific plans, corridor plans, vision plans, healthy community plans, and other complex planning projects throughout the country. Matt is an expert in creating inclusive and authentic public planning processes and creating more equitable, resilient, and sustainable cities. He has spoken and written extensively on applying the principles of new urbanism to comprehensive plans, incorporating public health concerns into the planning process, and promoting sustainable development.

GENERAL PLANS
East Palo Alto General Plan and Westside Area Plan (East Palo Alto, CA) Project Manager and Principal-in-Charge. Lead a multi-disciplinary team to develop a General Plan that includes policies and regulations for infill development, economic development, health, sustainability and social equity.

Developed an Area Plan for a 160-area section of the City with detailed policies on anti-displacement, tenant rights and affordable housing. Lead an extensive public outreach effort that included two advisory committees, citywide workshops, neighborhood meetings and social media activities. Mountain View General Plan (Mountain View, CA)
Served as Project Manager and Principal-in-Charge (in coordination with MIG). Duties included generating land use and urban design content, helping structure General Plan, and served as strategic advisor to the City. Ventura General Plan Update (Ventura, CA)
Serving as Principal-in-Charge for Ventura’s comprehensive Plan Update. The Plan will address critical topics affecting Ventura including housing, sea level rise, health and equity, mobility, and wildfire risk. Project includes extensive community engagement, including a diverse General Plan Advisory Committee, pop-up workshops, focus groups, stakeholder interviews, and public workshops. Thousand Oaks General Plan (Thousand Oaks, CA)
Served as Principal-in-Charge for first comprehensive update to the city’s General Plan. The plan incorporates new state laws and recent local planning efforts, and land use and mobility alternatives analysis. Project included complex planning and growth discussions and extensive community engagement program such as General Plan Advisory Committee, focus groups, stakeholder interviews, pop-ups, office hours, and virtual and in-person workshops. Hermosa Beach General Plan (Hermosa Beach, CA)
Served as Principal-in-Charge. Worked with stakeholders, advisory committee, and community members to comprehensively update the General Plan and integrated Local Coastal Plan with the goal of reaching carbon neutrality. Coachella General Plan Update (Coachella, CA)
Principal-in-Charge. Led a multidisciplinary team of consultants for the Coachella General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan. The implementationfocused Plan included a “place-based” approach to urban design and placemaking and a standalone community health and wellness element. West Hollywood General Plan (West Hollywood, CA)
Principal-in-Charge and Project Manager. Completed a comprehensive General Plan update focusing on corridor revitalization and improved quality of life. The project focused on infill development along the major transportation corridors, advancing social services and equity, and achieving significant reductions in GHG emissions.
South Gate General Plan (South Gate, CA)
Principal-in-Charge and Project Manager. Developed one of the first “formbased” General Plans and stand-alone public health elements in the country and a strong focus on urban design, economic development, social equity and environmental sustainability. Process included extensive community engagement, a design charrette, and managing a multi-disciplinary technical team.

EDUCATION
University of North Carolina,
Chapel Hill
Master of Regional Planning, 1997
University of Rochester, Rochester, NY
Bachelor of Arts, English, 1992

AFFILIATIONS &

CERTIFICATIONS
Member. Congress for the New
Urbanism, American Planning
Association
Senior Fellow. Environmental
Leadership Program

EXPERIENCE
Raimi+Associates
Berkeley, CA
Principal, 2006-present
Design, Community, & Environment
Berkeley, CA
Senior Associate, 2002-2006
SMWM
San Francisco, CA
Senior Associate, 1999-2002
Natural Resources Defense Council,
Associate, Washington, DC, 1997-
1999
Surface Transportation Policy Project,
Intern/Independent Consultant,
Washington, DC, 1998-1999
ICF Incorporated, Associate, Fairfax,
VA, 1992-1995
526
www.raimiassociates.com
Land Use and Circulation Element (Santa Monica, CA)
Project Manager and extension of staff. Prepared draft element content, developed the land use map and policies, and created a chapter on health and sustainability.

SPECIFIC PLANS AND PRECISE PLANS
Eastside Community Plan (West Hollywood, CA)
Project Manager and Principal-in-Charge. Worked with a community advisory committee to develop an implementationfocused community plan for the Eastside of West Hollywood. Topics included urban design, transportation, community identity, public safety, and economic development. The project included a community event that drew hundreds of Eastside residents to celebrate the identity of the neighborhood and provide input on the plan. Orange Line BRT Sustainable Corridor Plan (City of Los Angeles, CA) Project Manager and Principal-in Charge. Developed implementation-focused plan that included detailed station-specific and corridor-wide strategies for 13 stations along this active BRT corridor. Led to funding for multiple specific plans for stations along the corridor.
Thousand Oaks Downtown Core Master Plan (Thousand Oaks, CA) Principal-in-Charge. Completed a Master Plan for a 60-acre area in and around the Thousand Oaks City Hall and Civic Arts Plaza to create a pedestrian-focused vibrant downtown in a traditional, auto-oriented suburban city. Led a team of real estate economists, architects and transportation experts in creating a design framework with four primary actions for success, all which are implementable by the City.
North Bayshore Precise Plan (Mountain View, CA)
Principal-in-Charge and Co-Project Manager. Responsibilities included managing a multi-disciplinary team, creating form based development standards and regulations that convert a suburban office park into a 21st century mixed use district with office, residential and retail. Created standards for green buildings and to preserve natural habitat and endangered species. Included an innovative community benefits program that tied the allocation of office development to the construction of residential units and significant advances in green buildings. Fresno Central Southeast Area Specific Plan (Fresno, CA) Project Manager and Principal in Charge. Leading a team of consultants on a specific plan for the Central Southeast neighborhood of Fresno, a 2,220 acre area southeast of Downtown. The Specific Plan addresses a wide range of topics that impact the quality of life in the community including affordable housing, jobs and economic development, transportation, parks and open space, and a healthy environment.
El Camino Real Precise Plan (Mountain View, CA)
Principal-in-Charge. Developed form-based standards and regulations for infill development along this iconic corridor.

Plan identifies building heights, build-to lines, setbacks and stepbacks and other regulations to enhance walkability and improve connections with adjacent residential areas.
Fremont City Center Precise Plan (Fremont, CA)
Served as Principal-in-Charge. Led a multi-disciplinary team to transform a suburban commercial area into a downtown.

Plan includes identification of sub-areas, topic-specific policies, street standards, and a form-based code.

HEALTH, EQUITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
Plan for a Healthy Los Angeles: General Plan Health Element and Implementation Ordinances (Los Angeles, CA) Project Manager and Principal-in-Charge. Responsibilities included project coordination, writing sections of the health element, creating interactive web site on existing health conditions and developing implementation programs and ordinances.
Riverside County Health Element (Riverside, CA)
Project Manager and Principal-in-Charge. Responsibilities included developing topic-specific fact sheets; working with a technical advisory committee and writing the health element, one of the first county-level health elements in the State. Santa Clara County Health Element (Santa Clara County, CA) Principal-in-Charge. Responsibilities included project management, developing detailed existing conditions report, coordinating a community advisory committee and a department/agency advisory committee; and writing portions of the Health Element.
El Monte Health and Wellness Element (El Monte, CA)
Project Manager and Principal-in-Charge. Led a health element for the General Plan, one of the first in the State. Process included bi-lingual engagement, detailed existing conditions contrasting health conditions in different sub-areas of the City and detailed policies and implementation programs. 527
www.raimiassociates.com

GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS, TOOLKITS AND OTHER PUBLICATIONS
Once There Were Greenfields: How Urban Sprawl is Undermining America’s Environment, Economy and Social Fabric.

Co-authored for the Natural Resources Defense Council, 1999. Five Years of Progress: 110 Communities Where ISTEA is Making a Difference. Co-authored for the Surface Transportation Policy Project, 1996.
A Citizen’s Guide to LEED for Neighborhood Development, Natural Resources Defense Council, 2011. How to Create and Implement Healthy General Plans, Co-authored with Public Health Law & Policy Center of the Public Health Institute, 2008.
Understanding the Relationship Between Public Health and the Built Environment: A Report Prepared for the LEED-ND Core Committee. U.S. Green Building Council and Congress for the New Urbanism, 2006. LEED-ND Reference Guide
ULI LA Healthy Communities Toolkit
AIA Healthy Communities Toolkit
LA Metro Transit Supportive Planning Toolkit
VTA Best Practices Manual
Los Angeles Metro TOD Toolkit
528
www.raimiassociates.com

KYM DORMAN, MPH

PRINCIPAL AND CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER
Kym Dorman is a leading social sector consultant who brings an equity lens to evaluations, needs assessments, and planning processes, and expertise engaging in complex community collaborative processes that emphasize organizational and community capacity. With 25 years of experience as an applied researcher and facilitator, Kym’s expertise includes a range of topics, including economic development, community health and wellness, health care access, wellbeing across the life course, and active transportation, among others. She is skilled in qualitative and quantitative research methods, and has extensive experience using data and research to support community coalitions, local governments, non-profit organizations and foundations make informed decisions for their future. She is also fluent in Spanish.

KEY PROJECTS
Youth and Family Opportunity Initiative (Alameda County Health) Serving as project director for the evaluation of the the Youth and Family Opportunity (YFO) initiative which addresses inequities related to educational attainment and health outcomes among children, youth, and their families throughout Alameda County. Developed and conducted focus groups with program participants, survey with program staff, and interviews with program staff to explore how the YFO grantee strategies were being implemented and to identify how implementation could be strengthened.
Evaluation for San Francisco Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax (San Francisco Department of Public Health)
Served as project director for the multi-year evaluation and had led the development of the first strategic plan for the Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax (SDDT) Advisory Committee. Developed the SDDT evaluation to align with strategic plan goals and values, created logic model and identified meaningful quantitative metrics and qualitative measures to assess the impacts of SDDT funding allocations on communities and inequities. Oversaw development of the 2019-2020, 2020-2021, 2021-2022, and 2022-2023 evaluation reports, 2023 VideoVoice process, and the data highlighted for SDDT’s 5th anniversary. Clipper START Pilot Program Evaluation (Metropolitan Transportation Agency)
Oversaw development of evaluation tools, sampling plan, and analysis for evaluation of a means-based fare pilot program involving transit operators throughout the Bay Area’s nine counties. Conducted virtual (zoom) focus groups with interpretation. Identified developmental evaluation findings and recommendations at three points during pilot program. San José COVID-19 Recovery Task Force (City of San José) As project director, worked with the City of San José to develop a strategy to engage residents, community members, and businesses on matters of COVID-19 economic and social recovery, and especially those most impacted by the pandemic. This included facilitation of monthly Recovery Task Force meetings and subsequent working groups/committees that concluded with final recommendations from the Task Force to the City Council. Marin County Community Health Improvement Plan (County of Marin Department of Health and Human Services)
Facilitated a multi-sector steering committee in prioritizing three health issues and corresponding outcomes and strategies to address those issues and increase health and racial equity in Marin. Developed guiding principles that centered data on existing inequities in Marin as core to the prioritization process. Developed plan outlining how community leaders, agencies, and organizations can align efforts to improve health outcomes.

EDUCATION
San Francisco State University,
San Francisco, CA
Master of Public Health
University of California,
Santa Cruz, CA
Bachelor of Arts in Sociology and
Women’s Studies

EXPERIENCE
Raimi+Associates
Berkeley, CA
Principal & Chief Operating Officer,
2015-present
Harder + Company Community
Research
San Francisco, CA
Vice President, 2007-2015
Senior Research Associate,
2004-2007
Research Associate, 2002-2004
Research Assistant, 1999-2002
529
www.raimiassociates.com
Santa Clara County Transportation Needs Assessment (County of Santa Clara, Office of the County Executive) Led with Nelson/Nygaard to conduct the Santa Clara County Transportation Needs Assessment that focused on six key populations. Kym led the community engagement efforts for the 6 key populations for the assessment, which included young people in foster care, people receiving health and/or social services, and people being released from the County’s jail. Through the engagement, the team collected and analyzed 734 surveys, 7 focus groups, and 12 stakeholder interviews that resulted in overall findings and population-specific findings San Mateo County Community Collaboration for Children’s Success (San Mateo County Health System) Led the planning process for the CCCS initiative, which identified community-supported, evidence-based strategies to improve outcomes for children, youth, and families who disproportionately experience trauma and who have been involved in the child welfare and/or criminal justice systems in San Mateo County. The place-based, trauma-informed planning process developed community-specific action plans for four neighborhoods based on extensive community engagement with youth (13-24 years old), parents and caregivers of children and youth 0-24, and multi-sector youth and family focused community-based organizations and service providers. Process Evaluation of Implementation of the Santa Clara County Community Health Improvement Plan (Santa Clara County Public Health Department)
Kym served as project director for the process evaluation of the Countywide Community Health Improvement Plan. Using a collective impact approach, the process evaluation used mixed methods including a collaborative partner survey and key leader interviews to understand the strengths and challenges of this collaborative effort. REACH Ashland Youth Center Evaluation (County of Alameda) Serving as project director for the annual evaluation of REACH programming, its impact on disenfranchised and vulnerable youth, and the cross-disciplinary REACH partnership. Key highlights of past evaluations have included: analyzing individual-level participation data, revising the Results/Evaluation Framework, revising and analyzing the annual REACH Member Survey, conducting interviews and focus groups with youth, staff, and family members, and preparing final evaluation reports and presentations.
San Francisco Safe Routes to School Evaluation (San Francisco Municipal Transportation Authority) Served as project director for the multi-year evaluation. Oversaw the development of the 2019-2020, 2020-2021, and 2021-2022 SRTS evaluation reports, including overseeing data analyses, graphic design, and the development of the evaluation story for each year.
Santa Clara County Children’s Health Assessment Primary Data Collection and Facilitation Lead a qualitative assessment of children’s health in Santa Clara County. We conducted 19 focus groups, 30 key leader interviews, and collected over 1,000 surveys to understand more about the social determinants that affect children’s health outcomes across the county. Focus groups were conducted in English, Spanish, Mandarin, and Vietnamese. The project culminated in an engaging final report and a community and stakeholder “Call to Action” forum to identify action steps. University of California, Berkeley School of Public Health, Best Babies Zone Initiative Evaluation Served as project director to evaluate the place-based Best Babies Zone Initiative (BBZ). Conducted extensive surveys and interviews with community partners in Oakland, Cincinnati, and New Orleans to define an outcome evaluation that establishes shared baseline measures relevant to the project’s community sites to demonstrate impact over time. California Department of Public Health, Health in All Policies (HiAP) Process Evaluation* Led the process evaluation of the statewide HiAP collaborative process to identify successful elements of this collaborative, as well as challenges and early outcomes. Conducted stakeholder survey and key leader interviews.

Findings informed the development of Health in All Policies: A Guide for State and Local Governments (2013). Napa County Collaborative: Community Health Assessment,* Community Health improvement Plan,* Community Action Plan,* and Collaborative Process Evaluation
Directed the MAPP process to develop the Community Health Assessment and Community Health Improvement Plan.

Developed and conducted a Process Evaluation of the Live Healthy Napa County Collaborative Process and developed recommendations.
California Department of Public Health, Safe Routes to School Community Needs Assessment* Conducted an assessment of low-income and underserved communities in the state and explored challenges and opportunities for non-infrastructure Safe Routes to School programs in those diverse communities. CDPH will use recommendations to inform future program design and funding. *Denotes projects completed while serving as key staff at other organizations. 530
www.raimiassociates.com

TIFFANY ENG

SENIOR ASSOCIATE

EDUCATION
University of California, Berkeley
Master of City and Regional Planning,
Environmental Planning and Policy
University of California, Los Angeles
Bachelor of Arts in Art and Asian
American Studies

EXPERIENCE
Raimi + Associates; Berkeley, CA
Senior Associate, 2024
California Environmental
Justice Alliance (CEJA); Oakland, CA
Land Use Director, 2023-2024
Interim Co-Director, 2021 - 2023
Program Manager, 2016-2021
Asian Pacific Environmental
Network (APEN); Oakland, CA
Consultant/State Policy Fellow,
2015-2016
AYPAL: Building API Community
Power; Oakland, CA
Policy Director, 2012-2013
Co-Director, 2008-2012
Program Director, 2004-2008
Tiffany Eng is a Senior Planner with over twenty years of experience in grassroots campaigns, healthy cities and communities, organizational leadership, and capacity-building. She has an extensive background promoting equitable land use planning and is passionate about climate and environmental justice (EJ) solutions. Tiffany believes the key to creating healthy, just, and climate-resilient communities is through an environmental justice and land use planning lens.

KEY PROJECTS
Loma Linda Environmental Justice Element (Loma Linda, CA) Provide a disadvantaged community analysis based on CalEnviroScreen 4.0 data and R+A’s data screening process to provide community members and local stakeholders with key information to inform the development of the EJ Element. Develop strategies and facilitate community engagement activities to help develop environmental justice goals, policies, and objectives that address current environmental community concerns, socioeconomic challenges, and public health threats. SB 1000 Toolkit*
Co-authored the SB 1000 Toolkit: Planning for Healthy Communities to guide local governments, planners, CBOs, and other stakeholders in creating equitable Environmental Justice Elements that meet SB 1000 requirements. Environmental and Housing Justice Platform*
Co-created a new policy initiative to address the intersecting housing and environmental justice needs within California, along with over forty EJ, environmental, and housing justice organizations. Crafted five goals with associated policies that promoted resilience, anti-displacement, equity, and accountability. CalEnviroScreen: A Critical Tool for Achieving Environmental Justice in California*
Co-authored the CalEnviroScreen: A Critical Tool for Achieving Environmental Justice in California report to outline the tool’s methodology, identify current laws and programs utilizing the tool, and identifying other ways the tool could be used to further environmental justice. Educated planners and members of the CA State Legislature on the best uses of the CalEnviroScreen tool to promote equity and integrate environmental justice goals and policies into local land use planning.

Conducted research, mapped disadvantaged communities for each legislative district, and developed curriculum to educate diverse audiences on the CalEnviroScreen tool and the importance of cumulative impact methodologies.
Rethinking Local Control: Placing Environmental Justice and Civil Rights at the Heart of Land Use Decision-Making*
Co-authored the Rethinking Local Control: Placing Environmental Justice and Civil Rights at the Heart of Land Use Decision-Making Report which introduces a new framework for promoting California’s environmental and climate goals. Conducted case study analyses on the power of community-led decision-making and developed recommendations for promoting impactful and community-centered processes. CEJA Green Zones Initiative*
Provided strategic direction and a vision to CEJA’s Green Zones Initiative that advances campaigns for healthy, just, and climate resilient communities by integrating equity and environmental justice into land use planning. Focused on meaningful community engagement, training and capacity-building for members, and education on EJ topics.
* Denotes work completed while serving as key staff at other organizations

PUBLICATIONS
Poirier, L., Antonio, D., Dettmann, M.,
Eng, T., Ganata, J., Ghosh, S., Lopez, M.,
Karma, R., Natekal, A., & Brinkley, C.
(2024). Making plans findable, accessible,
interoperable, and reusable with data
infrastructure: A search engine for
constructing, analyzing, and visualizing
planning documents. Environment
and Planning B: Urban Analytics
and City Science, 0(0). https://doi.
org/10.1177/23998083241227471
531
www.raimiassociates.com

MICHELLE HERNANDEZ

INTERMEDIATE PLANNER I

EDUCATION
University of California, Berkeley
Berkeley, CA
Bachelor of Arts,
Sustainable Environmental Design
Minor in City & Regional Planning

AFFILIATIONS &

CERTIFICATIONS
LEED Green Associate
American Planning Association
Member

EXPERIENCE
Raimi + Associates
Berkeley, CA
Intermediate Planner,
2021 - Present
Urban Displacement Project
UC Berkeley
Berkeley, CA
Research Assistant
Student Environmental
Resource Center
Berkeley, CA
E-Waste Operations Associate
Michelle is a planner and designer with experience working on comprehensive and specific plans, community engagement strategies, climate change planning, and LEED green building certifications. She has a passion for interdisciplinary approaches that incorporate sustainability into all areas of planning and placemaking. She believes that equitable collaboration is necessary in designing adaptive and resilient communities.

KEY PROJECTS
Selma Downtown Strategic Plan (Selma, CA)
Serving as key staff, supporting project coordination and strategy development of the Strategic Plan. Developing community engagement material, coordinating outreach events, and facilitating community discussions.
Concord Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Rezone (Concord, CA) Serving as key staff, supporting the identification of sites to be rezoned for higher density multifamily housing in moderate- and high-resource areas of Concord.

Preparing outreach materials for and facilitating community engagement activities, including stakeholder meetings and community workshops. Petaluma General Plan Update (Petaluma, CA)
Serving as key staff for Petaluma’s comprehensive General Plan update. Leading the development of community engagement strategies and materials and facilitate discussions, including advisory committee meetings, pop-ups, and community workshops. Support project management and task coordination. Lindenville Specific Plan (South San Francisco, CA)
Served as key staff, supporting the development of the Lindenville Specific Plan and related community engagement activities. Led the development of maps and graphics, developed and translated community engagement materials, and coordinated outreach events.
South San Francisco General Plan + Climate Action Plan Update (South San Francisco, CA)
Served as key staff, prepared maps, graphics, and analysis for the General Plan and the Climate Action Plan, in addition to authoring the Our Plan section of the General Plan. Supported the development and implementation of community engagement activities. Aided in the design of the Digital General Plan and maintained the website. Palmdale Zoning Code Update (Palmdale, CA)
Supported the preparation of the draft zoning code for community review. Supported updates to the City’s Municipal Code for consistency with new zoning code and creation of English and Spanish-language Zoning User Manuals. Alameda Climate Action and Resiliency Plan Update (Alameda, CA) Supporting the mid-cycle update of the Climate Action and Resiliency Plan.

Reviewing existing strategies for consistency with State law and industry practices, coordinating and facilitating staff working group meetings and community discussions, and supporting the development of new and revised climate action strategies.
532
www.raimiassociates.com

CHRISTIAN LEDEZMA

INTERMEDIATE GRAPHIC DESIGNER I
Christian Ledezma is a research-driven graphic designer who understands the importance of clear, approachable communication in work that impacts the lives of individuals and communities. Christian’s work spans multiple disciplines and mediums ranging from print layout and design to interactive websites, to photography and video production. His work has covered topics such as general land use planning, climate resilience and sustainability, environmental justice and SB 1000, affordable housing, public health, and racial and social equity.

KEY PROJECTS
Culver City General Plan Update (Culver City, CA)
Led creative direction and designed and helped produce the PDF version of the Culver City General Plan Update. Building off existing brand standards to create a unique document template expressive of the City’s artistic character. Work included 16 unique illustrations, document layout, and web design.
Palmdale General Plan Update (Palmdale, CA)
Designed and developed the PDF General Plan and the accompanying digital general plan website. Work has included layout and poster design, web design, prototyping, wireframing, and website development using wordpress with elementor. South San Francisco General Plan Update (South San Francisco, CA) Served as the graphic designer for the General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan PDF documents and coordinating designer for the digital general plan website. Work has included document design and layout, unique document specific branding tieing into overall project branding ,and a visual system to link the physical and digital versions of the General Plan.
San Bernardino County Transportation Authority SB 1000 Equity Toolkit (San Bernardino County, CA)
Provided a full branding kit for the SBCTA’s SB 1000 Equity Toolkit and developed an interactive toolkit website. Branding has included a logo, colors, typography, presentation templates, document templates, and social media templates. The toolkit website features interactive data dashboards and policy components. LA Metro Joint Development (Los Angeles County, CA)
Collaborated with LA Metro to develop educational collateral regarding their affordable housing accelerator program. Work has included art directing a creative team, development of infographics, document layout, and photography all aimed at humanizing affordable housing.
Kaua‘i Climate Adaptation Plan (Kaua‘i County, HI)
Aided in project branding and designed and developed the project website for the Climate Adaptation Plan for the County of Kaua‘i. Work for this project has included an updated branding sheet, web design and development, as well as the development and testing of an interactive story map.
Santa Clara County Building Resilience Against Climate Effects Leadership Academy (Santa Clara County, CA)
Created a unique project identity in congruence with established brand standards for the County as part of a climate education toolkit. Elements created for the toolkit included document templates, unique project icons, and a color palette. Watsonville Downtown Specific Plan (Watsonville, CA)
Graphic designer for the Watsonville Downtown Specific Plan. Work has included document design incorporating existing brand standards along with the creation of 9 unique branded icons significant to the area used within the public draft document.

EDUCATION
Chapman University,
Orange, CA
Bachelor of Fine Arts,
Graphic Design

AFFILIATIONS
American Institute
of Graphic Arts (AIGA)

EXPERIENCE
Raimi + Associates
Los Angeles, CA
Graphic Designer,
2021-Present
Chapman University
Orange, CA
Graphic Designer
& Social Media Manager
VOS Group
Los Angeles, CA
Graphic Designer
City of Hope
Cancer Research Hospital
Duarte, CA
ITS Intern
533
Raimi + Associates 49 East Palo Alto Strategic Priorities and Workplan Proposal Appendix B: Completed Reports
The following pages include examples from a variety of projects including strategic plans, excerpts from General Plans and engagement materials. These include the following:
1) Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax Advisory Committee Strategic Plan 2020-2025 2) Palmdale General Plan: Vision and Guiding Principles and example implementation table 3) South San Francisco General Plan: Vision and Guiding Principles and example implementation table
4) Monterey County Strategic Plan Staff Survey
5) Ventura General Plan: Pop-up Workshop Boards (for visioning) and results from a survey on the vision and guiding principles from the City of Ventura General Plan 6) Community Collaboration for Children’s Success: East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan (2019- 2024)
534
Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax Advisory Committee
Draft Strategic Plan | 1
Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax
Advisory Committee
Strategic Plan 2020 - 2025
Prepared By:
535
Why Focus on Sugary Drinks?
Vision
Mission
Values
Priority Populations
Funding Recommendations
Cross-Cutting Approach to Strategies
Goal 1: Health People!
Goal 2: Healthy Places!
Impacts & Outcomes
..............................................4
...............................................................................................6 ............................................................................................6 ..............................................................................................7 ..................................................................8 .................................................8
.............................9
...........................................................10 ..........................................................11 .............................................................12 Table Of Contents
536
In November of 2016, the voters of San Francisco approved the passage of Proposition V, a Tax on Distributing Sugar-Sweetened Beverages. Proposition V established a 1 cent per ounce fee on the distribution of a bottled sugarsweetened beverage, syrup, or powder, within the City and County of San Francisco. The passage of Proposition V established two pieces of law: 1) the Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax in the City’s Business and Tax Regulations Code and 2) the Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax Advisory Committee in the City’s Administrative Code.

The Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax (SDDT) is a general excise tax on the privilege of conducting business within the City and County of San Francisco.

It is not a sales tax or use tax or other excise tax on the sale, consumption, or use of sugar-sweetened beverages. The tax went into effect on January 1, 2018. Funds collected from this tax are deposited in the City’s General Fund.

The Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax Advisory Committee (SDDTAC) was established through 2028 (unless the Board of Supervisors by ordinance extends the term of the Advisory Committee). It consists of 16 voting members appointed by the City’s Board of Supervisors, the Directors of four City departments/offices, and the San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD). The Committee is responsible for making recommendations to the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors on the effectiveness of the Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax and to submit a report that evaluates the impact of the Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax on beverage prices, consumer purchasing behavior, and public health. The Committee is also charged with providing recommendations regarding the potential establishment and/or funding of programs to reduce the consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages in San Francisco.

About the Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax
537
About the Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax
Sugary drinks are the primary contributor of added sugar to the United States diet. The consumption of unhealthy amounts of sugar, especially liquid sugar, is making communities sick by causing type 2 diabetes, dental caries, and other health issues.

Marketing of sugary drinks targets low-income communities and people of color across the U.S. and in San Francisco, which further contributes to health inequities.

In 2016, San Francisco voters took a stand against the
soda industry and passed a tax on the distribution of sugarsweetened beverages, known as the Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax (SDDT) or “soda tax” to encourage reduced consumption and collect resources to be invested in communities where consumption is greatest. This happened despite the fact that the soda industry spent nearly 20 million dollars to defeat the ballot measure.

The focus of the SDDT Advisory Committee (SDDTAC) is on communities most targeted by soda industry marketing, most burdened by the health impacts associated with consumption, and most in need of investment.

The beverage industry spends millions on advertising and targets low income communities and communities of color.

Subsidies make sugary drinks cheap and companies get a tax break when advertising to youth.

Why Focus on Sugary Drinks?
538
About the Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax
Low-income communities and communities of color:
• Experience the highest rates of chronic diseases such as type 2 diabetes, obesity, heart disease, and tooth decay.
• Have the highest concentration of sugary beverage consumption. • Are disproportionately targeted by aggressive and exploitative marketing campaigns by the soda and sugary drinks industry.
• Experience one of the fastest growing wealth gaps between rich and poor.

Structural racism and systematic
disenfranchisement
Inequities are a result of structural violence
and systemic racism that include policies,
practices, and resource allocations that
create unequal conditions in which people
live. The cumulative impact of living under
these oppressive systems can negatively
effect physical and mental health outcomes,
as well as the well-being of both individuals
and communities.

The SDDTAC focuses on changing policies,
systems, and environments to address:
• Poverty and social exclusion as a root
cause of health inequities.
• Social determinants of health, including
reducing barriers to housing, healthy
food and beverages, education, safe neighborhoods and environments, employment, healthcare, and others.
• Health disparities from holistic approaches such as bio-psycho-social models and mind, body, spirit models that take into account the whole person and the communities in which they live.

Why Focus on Sugary Drinks? (continued)
Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax Advisory Committee
Draft Strategic Plan | 5
Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax Advisory Committee
Strategic Plan | 5
539
What is
a Sugar
Sweetened
Beverage?
A sugar-sweetened
beverage (SSB) means
any non-alcoholic
beverage intended for
human consumption
that contains caloric
sweetener and contains
25 or more calories
per 12 fluid ounces of
beverage, including
but not limited to all
drinks and beverages
commonly referred
to “soda,” “pop,” “cola,’’
soft drinks” “sports
drinks,” “energy drinks’’
“sweetened iced teas” or
any other similar names.

Vision
What does the SDDTAC hope to achieve in the long term?
Mission
What does the SDDTAC do? Why does it exist?
What is
a SugarSweetened
Beverage?
A sugar-sweetened
beverage (SSB) means
any non-alcoholic
beverage intended for
human consumption
that contains added
caloric sweetener and
contains more than 25
calories per 12 fluid
ounces of beverage,
including but not
limited to all drinks and
beverages commonly
referred to “soda,”
“pop,” “cola,’’ soft drinks”
“sports drinks,” “energy
drinks’’ “sweetened iced
teas” or any other similar
names.

San Francisco improves health, eliminates
health disparities, and achieves equity
through effective services and changes to the
environment, systems, and policies.

Nutrition is a key element of health and can be a protective factor against or cause of diet-related chronic diseases, a type of health disparity especially relevant to the Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax. Additionally, San Francisco is defined to include government districts, agencies and departments; service providers; community organizations; and the City’s diverse residents and communities.

SDDTAC makes funding recommendations
that support services and other innovative,
community-led work to decrease sugary
beverage consumption and related chronic
diseases.

Evaluation is critical and necessary to inform funding
recommendation and to effectively decrease sugary beverage consumption. The SDDTAC has a mandate to evaluate and to develop recommendations from the evaluation findings.
540
Values
What does the SDDTAC stand for?
Supporting community-led and culturally
relevant work. Community-led work should be
led by communities that are disproportionately
impacted by marketing for and consumption of
sugary beverages from the beverage industry
and diet-sensitive chronic diseases (i.e., SDDTAC’s
priority populations), and culturally relevant work
should be responsive to these communities and
populations.

Building strong collaborations and
partnerships. Funding should support
existing and new community-based
partnerships and collaborations that
align resources to increase capacity,
effectiveness and impact of strategies,
programs and services.

Prioritizing results and long-term impacts.

Funding should support policy, systems,
and environmental changes that include
programming and go beyond programming, to
change the structures in which we work, live,
learn, and play. Adopting a Policy, Systems
& Environmental (PSE) change approach
can help create sustainable, comprehensive
measures to improve community health, as
well as enrich and expand the reach of current
health preventive efforts and engage diverse
stakeholders with the goal of improving health.

Eliminating structural inequities and
achieving equity. Equity (including
health equity and racial equity) means
that everyone has a fair and just chance
to be reach their full potential and be
healthy. The root causes of structural
inequities and health disparities (e.g.,
systems of oppression, intentionally
and unintentionally/implicitly biased
policies, resource allocation) need
to be addressed in other to achieve
equity.

Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax Advisory Committee
Strategic Plan | 7
541
SDDTAC funding will be prioritized for work that supports the following communities (both as distinct and overlapping communities):
• Low-income San Franciscans
• Black/African American, Pacific Islander, Native American, Latinx, Asian communities
• Children, youth, and young adults 0-24 years old
Priority Populations
The Committee recommends that SDDT funds:
• Support the aim of the tax itself by reducing sugary drink consumption and supporting public health through a
reduction of diet-related diseases
• Support implementation and the work of the Committee, such as:
• Infrastructure (e.g., support for the committee,
evaluation)
• Technical assistance (e.g., help CBOs respond to RFPs, help CBOs evaluate impact of funds)
• Media and communications
Funding Recommendations
542
Expand peer-led/promotora-led (community health worker) interventions within multiple strategies that:

Peer/promotora-led approaches value how community members can leverage their knowledge of their community and relationships to promote and enhance change among peers. Working with peers who share the same language, culture, ethnicity, and life experiences as them, peer educators/promotoras share information in culturally relevant ways while building trusting relationships.

Cross-Cutting Approach to Strategies
• Value and involve communities in
determining how activities are shaped
and implemented in advancing health
outcomes.
• Promote the development of leadership,
skills, and capacity of community
members to become more effective
leaders in their communities.
• Support development opportunities
that lead to increased employability and
employment.
• Value community members as vehicles
for promoting and enhancing change
by educating and sharing information
among peers.
• Are shaped and informed by languages,
cultural practices, traditional knowledge,
perspectives, and expressions that
reflect communities.
• Remove barriers to information and
services.

Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax Advisory Committee
Strategic Plan | 9
543
We know that the sugary drinks industry
(also called Big Soda) targets low-income
communities and communities of color in
San Francisco. A focus on healthy people
provides an opportunity to invest in
community to address health inequities. To
achieve this, the SDDTAC will recommend
directing funds to community-led and
informed strategies and initiatives, with a
focus on priority populations. The SDDTAC
will also support critical health-promoting
education, programs and services to ensure
people can access and navigate available
services and resources.

Goal 1: Healthy People!
Strategies for Goal 1: Healthy People!
Funding to support healthy people will be focused on the priority populations in San Francisco and will include the following strategies.

1. Build community capacity and develop leadership to
promote community power and address the root causes of
health inequities.

2. Provide health-promoting education, programs, and
services that are free and low-cost to ensure accessibility and engagement among priority populations.

3. Provide job readiness, skills training, and career pathways to support the health and well-being of priority populations (including carrying out the education, programs, and services outlined in strategy 2).
544
Having safe, equitable, and healthy physical, economic, and social environments is critical to achieving SDDTAC’s vision. To support healthy places in San Francisco, the SDDTAC has prioritized addressing the root causes of health inequities. Making sustainable reductions to sugary beverage consumption and diet-related chronic disease requires improvements to the City’s infrastructure, built environment, and retail environment, as well as a reduction in income inequality and structural racism.

Strategies for Goal 2: Healthy Places!
Funding to support healthy places will be focused on the places where priority populations are born, play, learn, live, work, get cared for, and gather. The following strategies will be implemented throughout these places.

Goal 2: Healthy Places!

1. Expand access to healthy food,
water, and oral health (e.g.,
healthy retail, hydration stations,
breastfeeding, healthy food
vouchers)

2. Decrease access and availability to
sugary beverages

3. Increase opportunities for physical
activity (e.g., park improvements)

4. Increase economic opportunities
in priority neighborhoods (e.g., via
neighborhood associations led by
long-term residents)

5. Increase healthy messaging
related to nutrition
Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax Advisory Committee
Strategic Plan | 11
545
Impact:Eliminate
health disparities
and achieve equity, especially among
priority populations.

Outcomes: All outcomes will focus on priority populations.

Community + Economic
Outcomes
• Increase in hiring and economic
opportunity
• Increase food security
Health Outcomes
• Decrease in diet-related
chronic diseases (e.g.,
dental caries, heart disease,
hypertension, obesity,
stroke, Type 2 Diabetes)
Behavioral Outcomes
• Decrease in sugary drink
consumption
• Increase in tap water
consumption
• Increase in fruit/vegetable
consumption
• Increase in breastfeeding
• Increase in physical activity
Impact & Outcomes
546
Sugary Drinks Distributor Tax
Advisory Committee
Strategic Plan 2020 - 2025
For more information please go to www.sfdph.org/sddtac and www.sodatax-sf.org 547
9 Vision and Guiding
Principles
Envision Palmdale 2045 presents the community’s vision for Palmdale for the next two decades. This chapter provides an overview of the community’s values and guiding principles for the future, which are woven throughout the General Plan and create the framework for Palmdale 2045.

Chapter 1
548
10 Ch. 1 Vision and Guiding Principles
Introduction
Through stakeholder focus groups, community
workshops, pop-up events, online community
surveys, and meetings with the General Plan
Advisory Committee (GPAC), the community
explored how individuals envision the future
of Palmdale, what makes it unique and special,
and what things residents and businesses would
like to change. Building on nearly four years of
community input, this chapter summarizes a
series of high-level visioning themes and a list of
guiding principles or community values organized
under each of those themes.
549
11 Vision Statement
“Palmdale is a thriving, safe, socially, and economically diverse community where people of all ages live and work in harmony.

Palmdale offers affordable living, high quality jobs and educational opportunities in a beautiful high desert setting.” Vision Themes and Guiding Principles
Described on the following spread are values and direction for Palmdale 2045, set forth by the Palmdale community that chart a course for the future of the City. Vision themes paint a picture of what Palmdale will look like in the future, serving as a foundation for policies and implementation actions. While guiding principles provide further details on a vision theme and serve as a framework for future decision making. Together, the vision themes and guiding principles establish the basis for each element of Palmdale 2045, reflecting the unique needs and priorities for Palmdale residents. Through an extensive community engagement process, the vision themes and guiding principles were vetted by the community; initially prepared with input from the Palmdale General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC), community members, and later confirmed by the Planning Commission and City Council. 550
12 Ch. 1 Vision and Guiding Principles
Vision Themes and Guiding Principles

A UNIFIED AND WELCOMING COMMUNITY
THAT WE’RE PROUD TO LIVE IN ACTIVE AND VIBRANT DOWNTOWN DIVERSE AND HIGH-QUALITY JOB OPTIONS

SAFE, HEALTHY PLACE TO LIVE AND WORK

HIGH QUALITY MEDICAL AND MENTAL

DIVERSE AND RESILIENT LOCAL ECONOMY HEALTHCARE
• Respect and promote diversity
within Palmdale
• Promote Palmdale’s positive
reputation in the region
• Boost community beautification
• Offer opportunities for youth to
stay in Palmdale – jobs, housing,
education
• Enhance partnerships with
surrounding communities in the
Antelope Valley
• Create a vibrant and active
downtown environment
• Improve the appearance of
Palmdale Boulevard
• Encourage and foster local
businesses
• Provide space for community
gathering and events
• Increase opportunities for
entertainment and/or shopping
• Address displacement issues
• Provide job training for Palmdale
residents in key industries
• Connect residents with job
opportunities in aerospace and
other emerging sectors
• Encourage telecommuting within
Palmdale
• Promote diverse entry-level and
mid-level jobs in Palmdale
• Improve neighborhood safety
• Address crime and safety concerns
• Improve access to parks and open
space
• Support local foster youth and
those experiencing homelessness
• Foster active living with
improvements to the pedestrian
environment
• Prioritize walking, biking, and
access to local and regional transit
• Promote living and working in
Palmdale and reducing commute
times
• Improve access to and promote
quality healthcare services and
facilities in Palmdale
• Attract physicians to Palmdale
• Maintain Palmdale Regional
Hospital and encourage continued
expansion of services and facilities
• Retain and support aerospace
industry presence in Palmdale
• Leverage economic opportunities
from an expanded transportation
center and potential passenger air
service at Palmdale Regional Airport
• Attract new sustainable employers
and industries to Palmdale
• Maintain and enhance smart city
technology in Palmdale to support
local businesses and telecommuting
• Support local small businesses
551
13 PALMDALE’S BEAUTIFUL NATURAL SETTING

FOREFRONT OF TRANSPORTATION

INNOVATIONS GENERAL PLAN IMPLEMENTATION

HIGH QUALITY AND ACCESSIBLE

EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES

HOUSING OPTIONS FOR RESIDENTS AT

DIFFERENT STAGES OF LIFE AND ABILITY
• Maintain safe and convenient access
to open space and trails
• Improve connectivity, beautify
trails, and open space
• Expand and improve public parks
to meet the needs of current and
future residents
• Preserve existing mountain views
• Preserve access to a dark night sky
• Maintain high air quality
• Leverage transportation
investments in Palmdale
• Build on High-Speed Rail
opportunities
• Bring air service to Palmdale
Regional Airport
• Improve local transit
• Establish metrics for tracking
General Plan implementation
• Regular review and update of
General Plan goals and policies
• Promote and expand higher
educational opportunities in
Palmdale
• Develop additional trade school
training and apprentice programs
• Promote opportunities for
high-quality childcare and early
education
• Expand partnerships and
programs with public schools, local
government, and major employers
within Palmdale
• Create and preserve affordable
housing for residents of Palmdale
• Increase supply and diversity of
housing to support different types of
households including seniors, young
adults, families, empty nesters,
individuals or families with special
needs, and multigenerational
families
• Maintain the City’s quiet and safe
neighborhoods
• Maintain rural and semi-rural
neighborhoods in Palmdale
• Connect new development to public
transit and open space or public
parks
552
104
Ch. 5 Land Use and Community Design
Short-term Mid-term Long-term Ongoing
Timeframe Key
Implementation Actions
The table below identifies programs, policy updates, planning efforts, coordination efforts, and other actions that will help implement the General Plan’s land use vision and policies. Programs are consistent with this chapter’s goals and policies.

The table provides a description of each Implementation Action and lists the correlating policies. Each action also identifies a timeframe for implementation with Short-term representing a 1–3-year timeframe, Medium-term is 4-7 years, Long-term is 8+ years and Ongoing represents an action that the City should continue. Additionally, the table includes the City department that should function as the lead for implementing the actions.

Corresponding
Goals Description Timeframe Responsible Department
All Goals
Zoning Code Updates. Complete a
comprehensive update to the citywide zoning
code.

IN PROCESS
Economic and
Community
Development
LUD-22, 23
Dissolved Specific Plans. Council will formally
dissolve five Specific Plans that are being
eliminated through updated GPLU designations
(Joshua Hills, Hillside Residential, Palmdale
Trade and Commerce Center, Foothill Ranch, and
Palmdale Business Park).

Economic and
Community
Development
LUD-20, 23, 24
Updated Subdivision Design Guidelines.

Review and update as needed regulations
applicable to subdivision projects, including
connectivity standards, sidewalk standards,
green infrastructure standards, etc., as needed.

Economic and
Community
Development and
Public Works
LUD-1, 2, 5, 10
Infill Incentives. Develop incentives for
development that is close to existing residents
and municipal services/utilities.

Economic and
Community
Development and
Public Works
553
105
Corresponding
Goals Description Timeframe Responsible Department
LUD-2, 4
Development Fact Sheets. Create and
promote a series of one-page fact sheets about
permitting, zoning, building, and development
requirements and questions (such as ADUs or
other new regulations).

Economic and
Community
Development
LUD-1, 5
Identify/Fund Green Zones. Seek support and
funding from regional agencies (e.g. SCAG) to
accelerate development in identified infill zones.

See SJVCOG program ‘Green Means Go.’
Economic and
Community
Development
LUD-1, 3, 5, 10
Key Corridor Infrastructure. Pursue funding
for sewer, water, drainage, streets, and other
infrastructure upgrades to support higher density
development especially along key commercial/
mixed-use corridors.

Public Works
LUD-2, 21
Greenfield Plan Checklist. Prepare a checklist
that new development in non-infill areas must
conduct, including an evacuation analysis and
fire prevention standards.

Economic and
Community
Development
LUD-6, 9, 10
Avenue Q. Redesign Avenue Q to create a “Main
Street” and to complement the adjacent highspeed rail station.

Economic and
Community
Development
LUD-6, 10
Active Ground Floors. Enforce active frontage
requirements for any new or renovated publicfacing building facades in the PTASP. Consider similar requirements for other avenues/corridors
to improve eyes on the street and ground-floor
interest.

All Departments
LUD-2, 3, 5
Future Area Plans. Identify future corridors
or districts that require area/specific planning
efforts.

Economic and
Community
Development
554
106
Ch. 5 Land Use and Community Design
Lake Palmdale at Sunset
Corresponding
Goals Description Timeframe Responsible Department
LUD-8
Assess Public Art Fund Implementation.

Review on an annual basis the funds collected,
and public art produced through the Public Art
Fund program. Assess the outcomes and make
recommendations for changes to City Council
as necessary and update the five-year Public Art
Work Plan when relevant.

Economic and
Community
Development, Parks and
Recreation, and Public
Art Commission
LUD-4, 5, 6, 7
Placemaking Program. Implement
recommended street improvements including
sidewalk widening, street trees, street furniture
and lighting installations in Downtown and along
Palmdale Boulevard.

Economic and
Community
Development and
Public Works
LUD-22, 23, 24
Light Pollution Guidelines. Adopt guidelines for
outdoor lighting located in proximity to wildlife
and natural areas in order to minimize light
pollution.

Economic and
Community
Development
LUD-20, 23
Trail Signage Program. Undertake a
comprehensive project to provide wayfinding/
signage leading from neighborhood streets,
commercial centers, and community parks to
wilderness areas and mountain/hillside trails.

Parks and Recreation
LUD-1, 2, 3
Core Service Areas. Prioritize capital
spending in neighborhoods that promote
active transportation, mixed-use support
improvements to core service areas.

Economic and
Community
Development
All Goals
General Plan Review. Review the General
Plan on a five-year cycle, including a review of
individual elements and community programs.

Economic and
Community
Development
All Goals
Development Fees. Continuously update
citywide development impact fees for
infrastructure, affordable housing, other
community benefits, and long-range planning, as
economic conditions dictate.

All City Departments
LUD-3, 24 Rural Mobility Improvements. Improve the
condition of unpaved streets in rural areas. Public Works 555
8 SHAPE SSF: 2040 GENERAL PLAN
CHAPTER 1Our Vision for the Future
1 PART I: OUR PLAN
556
OUR VISION FOR THE FUTURE 1
9 Innovation
557 Sustainability

OUR VISION FOR THE FUTURE
Shape SSF 2040 presents our community’s vision for South San Francisco for the next two decades. The General Plan provides a roadmap for the City to implement policies and actions that create a resilient community, improve the quality of life of its residents, and expand economic development opportunities. The development of this plan has been guided by an overarching vision, a set of community values, and guiding principles that were shaped through community input.VisionSouth San Francisco is a place where everyone can thrive. Its high quality of life, diverse and inclusive community, livable neighborhoods and excellent services, culture of innovation, and environmental leadership ensure all people have the opportunity to reach their full potential.

ValuesThroughout the General Plan process, community members identified many shared values and beliefs. These cross-cutting community values include: diversity and inclusion, livability, sustainability, and innovation. While each guiding principle, goal, policy, and action outlines what the city wants to achieve and plans to do, these values describe how future actions should be implemented. 10 SHAPE SSF: 2040 GENERAL PLAN
East of 101
558
Diversity + Inclusion
We celebrate our diversity. We proactively promote diversity and inclusion for all races, ethnicities, genders, sexual orientations, abilities, ages, religions, and cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds. We strive to ensure equitable access to services and resources for all, build collaborative partnerships, and promote civic engagement.

SustainabilityWe strive to build and maintain a healthy and safe city. Our actions reduce climate pollution, adapt to climate disruptions, preserve natural resources, foster a prosperous and just economy, and meet the needs of current and future generations to ensure all people have the opportunity to reach their full potential.

LivabilityWe cherish our high quality of life. Residents of all ages, income levels, and abilities are able to comfortably live in a variety of housing options and can easily access quality parks, recreational facilities, libraries, and community services. We can travel via safe and reliable transportation options, including walking, biking, and public transit.

InnovationWe encourage innovation, creative thinking, and state-of-the art solutions. We pilot new tools and technologies and forge public-private partnerships that improve the well-being of residents and the efficiency of City operations and businesses.

OUR VISION FOR THE FUTURE 1
11 Pride month at City Hall
City Hall
Orange Memorial Park
559
12 SHAPE SSF: 2040 GENERAL PLAN
Affordable, Safe, Attractive, Amenity-Rich NeighborhoodsThe City of South San Francisco ensures a high quality of life for all residents by providing a diverse supply of housing affordable to all income levels. The City promotes housing options for households with distinct needs, including multigenerational families, empty nesters, and younger and older adults. The City of South San Francisco encourages new housing production while also preserving affordable housing and protecting vulnerable residents from housing instability and displacement. The City guides new housing into complete neighborhoods with access to retail and services, parks and open space, community services, and transit. In promoting the production of new housing, the city will make progress to achieving a better balance of jobs and housing. The City of South Francisco enhances the safety and aesthetics of its neighborhoods.

High-Quality and Accessible Services, Facilities, and Amenities for Residents at All stages of their lives• The City of South San Francisco provides high quality and accessible services, facilities, and amenities for residents at all stages of their lives. As a “smart city”, South San Francisco leverages high-speed internet technology and connectivity to improve engagement, transportation, utilities, education, public health and safety, environmental quality, energy, and the quality and efficiency of City operations. The City ensures digital equality by promoting internet connectivity in all neighborhoods to bridge access to reliable and affordable information. • The City increases access to and quality of parks and open spaces and invests in the expansion and modernization of its parks and open space system. The City supports the creation of pedestrian and bicycle linkages to Sign Hill, the San Francisco Bay Trail, schools, and community parks. The City supports South San Francisco Unified School District in its mission to graduate responsible, productive, and environmentally aware citizens by providing expanded educational and recreational opportunities and programs for all ages, including childcare, preschool, afterschool activities, special needs programs, aquatics, senior services, art, theater, music, libraries, and STEM and STEAM learning opportunities. • The City supports well trained, community-centered Fire, Police, and Emergency Response that provides compassionate service, follow practices and standards for safe interactions, continually improve department practices and community relations, and respond to incidents in a timely manner.

GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Sign Hill
560
OUR VISION FOR THE FUTURE 1
13 A Safe, Convenient, and Accessible Transportation Network Well-connected to the regionThe City of South San Francisco prioritizes a safe, convenient, and accessible transportation network that is well-connected to the region. South San Francisco has “complete streets” that provide pedestrian and bicycle facilities that invite people of all ages and abilities. Anyone can access public transportation to get anywhere in the city or around the Bay Area. The City embraces and prepares for emerging transportation innovations and micro-mobility, such as scooters, bike share, and electric buses and vehicles.

A Prosperous Downtown and Local Economy• The City of South San Francisco nurtures a thriving and diverse local economy, capitalizing on the city’s strategic location near Silicon Valley, San Francisco, San Francisco International Airport, and along critical transportation corridors. The City supports local businesses, including retail, grocery, dining, entertainment, and arts and cultural uses, while simultaneously strengthening its role as the worldwide hub of the biotech and life sciences industries and attracting more jobs in the technology sector, professional office sector, and other sectors with long-term growth potential and the ability to diversify the city’s supply of high-wage jobs. The City embraces its legacy as “The Industrial City” and supports a diversity of light industrial, manufacturing, and maker businesses to maintain a core of middle-wage jobs in the city. • The City of South San Francisco’s Downtown celebrates the city’s history and cultural diversity through community events, arts, and programming. Downtown is a destination for all, with a diversity of retail, public open spaces, services, institutions, religious facilities, entertainment, housing, and a public library. The City invests in streetscapes, sidewalks, landscaping, façade improvements and maintenance to improve safety and walkability in Downtown and create visual interest. The City provides resources to preserve and nurture local businesses that make Downtown special. The City prioritizes improvements that make Downtown accessible via public transit, including Caltrain. • The City partners with business, education, and service organizations to help build career pipelines to match residents to local jobs in the life sciences, industrial, and civil sectors through education and training, creating opportunities for social mobility, ever adapting to a changing world. The City believes its long-term economic vitality depends on having high quality, well-resourced public education and workforce training, and the City will continue to foster educational partnerships with the local school district, community college district, and other organizations. The City supports Universal Pre-K and childcare, striving to ensure every child has an opportunity to attend pre-kindergarten.

A Resilient Community• A resilient community is a commitment to a thriving future for all South San Francisco city residents. The ability to survive, adapt, and grow regardless of future shocks and stresses requires an investment in policies and actions that protect our most vulnerable. Housing, transportation, employment areas, and community-serving facilities and infrastructure are all at risk from earthquakes, warmer temperatures, rising sea levels, and more extreme weather days. The City prioritizes resources for its most vulnerable communities and increases the capacity for the most disadvantaged residents and workers to withstand hazards and adapt to climate disruption. • At the same time, South San Francisco takes a leadership role in the region in creating a cleaner, healthier, and more economically viable future through conscious investments and regulatory measures. The City adopts innovative practices and partnerships aimed at climate pollution reduction, efficient energy and water use, and clean air. These sustainability and climate actions aim to fight climate change and increase community resilience. 561
234 SHAPE SSF: 2040 GENERAL PLAN

IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
Policy Implementation Action Priority Primary Responsibility GOAL PR-1: South San Francisco equitably provides improved parkland, recreational facilities, and services for all residents.

Policy PR-1.4
Action PR-1.4.1: Provide targeted recreational services. Explore opportunities to provide and subsidize more recreational services to targeted populations (e.g., youth, older adults, persons with disabilities, and low-income populations).

High Recreation Division (P&R)
GOAL PR-2: The city has an expanded network of improved parkland to accommodate the physical and social needs of users of all ages and abilities.

Policy PR-2.1
Action PR-2.1.1: Adopt and implement Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Adopt and implement the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, updating the Plan every 5-to-10 years. Develop the proposed parks identified in the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Include new categories in parks classification system: San Mateo County-owned park trailheads, SSFUSD properties the public can access per joint use agreements, and privately-owned public open spaces, among others.

High Parks Division (P&R)
Action PR-2.1.2: Complete update of the Orange Memorial Park Master Plan. Complete update and implement the Orange Memorial Park Master Plan. Medium Parks Division (P&R) GOAL PR-4: The City collaborates with a strong network of partners to improve and expand park and recreational opportunities across South San Francisco.

Policy PR-4.2
Action PR-4.2.1: Establish Sunshine Gardens Shared use agreement. Establish a partnership with the South San Francisco Unified School District to provide access to Sunshine Gardens Elementary School open space areas and playground.

High City Manager
Action PR-4.2.2: Provide recreational programing in joint use facilities. Coordinate with the South San Francisco Unified School District and San Mateo County Health Department, as well as local health providers and other community organizations, to provide recreational programming not offered in nearby public parks or recreation centers, such as after-school fitness and education programs.

High Recreation Division (P&R)
Refer to the Implementation Matrix within the "Our Plan to Get There" chapter to view additional information regarding implementation actions such as timeframe and secondary department responsibilities. 562
ABUNDANT AND ACCESSIBLE PARKS AND RECREATION 10
235
Policy Implementation Action Priority Primary Responsibility Policy PR-4.2 Action PR-4.2.3: Expand afterschool and summer childcare. Continue to work with the South San Francisco Unified School District to expand after-school and summer childcare. High Parks Division (P&R) GOAL PR-5: Downtown has improved access to parks, gathering spaces, and public amenities.

Policy PR-5.1
Action PR-5.1.1: Fund Downtown pop-up parks. Establish and fund a Downtown pop-up park program as a temporary measure until new parks are opened. Encourage local food and art vendors, e.g., “Off the Grid”.

High Parks Division (P&R)
Action PR-5.1.2: Designate new Downtown/Lindenville park site. Designate a site for a new neighborhood park adjacent to Downtown and Lindenville on the block bounded by Railroad Avenue, Spruce Avenue, Colma Creek, and Linden Avenue and require parkland dedication.

Medium Parks Division (P&R)
Action PR-5.1.3: Study City Hall park space opportunities. Study opportunities to expand active park space on the City Hall property. Low Capital Projects (CM) GOAL PR-6: The City provides convenient and safe trails and other pedestrian connections throughout the community.

Policy PR-6.1
Action PR-6.1.1: Create Colma Creek trail. Create a trail along Colma Creek from the Bay Trail to Orange Memorial Park, incorporating lighting, public art, and native and high-value landscaping. Medium Parks Division (P&R)Action PR-6.1.2: Implement active transportation improvements to parks and open space.Implement new active transportation connections to the Centennial Way Trail, Colma Creek, and the San Francisco Bay Trail.

Low Planning Division (ECD)
Action PR-6.1.3: Implement Centennial Trail Vision Plan. Implement the Centennial Trail Vision Plan. Seek opportunities to create more mid-block access to Centennial Way trail. Medium Parks Division (P&R) Action PR-6.1.4: Develop Pacific Gas and Electric and Union Pacific trails. Partner with Pacific Gas & Electric and Union Pacific to reuse utility corridors and rail rights-of-way as trails. Low Parks Division (P&R) Action PR-6.1.5: Require new development to link to trails. Require new development to tie into the park and trail system by providing linkages to existing parks or dedicating new park land or trail easements.

Medium Planning Division (ECD)
563
236 SHAPE SSF: 2040 GENERAL PLAN
Policy Implementation Action Priority Primary Responsibility GOAL PR-7: South San Francisco provides well-maintained and sustainable parks and recreational facilities to meet the needs of current and future residents.

Policy PR-7.6 Action PR-7.6.1: Complete pool design and financing studies. Move forward with design and financing studies for a new pool. High Capital Projects (CM) Policy PR-7.7
Action PR-7.7.1: Adopt Public Art Master Plan. Adopt and implement the Public Art Master Plan, updating the Master Plan every 5-to-10 years. High Recreation Division (P&R) Action PR-7.7.2: Facilitate community engagement on public art selection. Establish a process to allow community input into public art selection. Low Recreation Division (P&R) Action PR-7.7.3: Educate community on public art. Produce public art educational materials for each artwork in the City’s collection and make these available to the public. Detail the locations of public art installations in materials such as walking tour guideposts, physical markers, web-based maps, or podcasts.

Medium Recreation Division (P&R)
Action PR-7.7.4: Support community-based creation of public art. Develop and coordinate community-based efforts to create public art pieces. Low Recreation Division (P&R) GOAL PR-8: Parks and recreational facilities have the appropriate staffing to offer high-quality recreational programs and offerings for residents of all ages.

Policy PR-8.10
Action PR-8.10.1: Identify and pilot enrichment programs. Identify and pilot new ways to engage young people and their families who have not previously participated in City-run enrichment programming – and use these efforts to identify common reasons youth and families have not participated in these community resources.

Medium Recreation Division (P&R)
Action PR-8.10.2: Target locations for enrichment programs. Use targeted locations and coordinate with existing programs/organizations to strengthen/expand youth development opportunities specifically for youth of color and youth from historically disenfranchised communities.

Medium Recreation Division (P&R)
564
ABUNDANT AND ACCESSIBLE PARKS AND RECREATION 10
237
Policy Implementation Action Priority Primary Responsibility GOAL PR-9. South San Francisco maintains quality childcare and preschool programs citywide.

Policy PR-9.1 Action PR-9.1.1: Implement Child Care Master Plan. Adopt and implement the Child Care Master Plan, updating the Plan every 5-to-10 years. High Recreation Division (P&R) Policy PR-9.2
Action PR-9.2.1: Expand funding for universal preschool. Continue exploring possible funding to establish and maintain universal preschool or to establish universal preschool for lowerincome families. High Recreation Division (P&R) Policy PR-9.3
Action PR-9.3.1: Update Zoning code for childcare. Update the Zoning Code to: • Allow large family care homes by right in residential units as required by Senate Bill 234 (2019). • Allow childcare facilities by right in all residential land use designations when located within one-quarter of a mile from public and institutional uses, e.g., schools and churches. • Allow childcare facilities in residential neighborhoods that meet specified performance standards.
• Allow childcare facilities in mixed use districts East of 101 and in Lindenville. • Allow childcare facilities by right in the business technology park land use designation.

High Planning Division (ECD)
Action PR-9.3.2: Maintain land inventory for childcare. Conduct an inventory of property that may be converted or developed into public or private Early Childcare Education facilities. Medium Planning Division (ECD)Action PR-9.3.3: Explore parking reductions for childcare facilities. Low Planning Division (ECD) Action PR-9.3.4: Provide incentives for new development to create childcare facilities. Provide incentives to new development to create childcare facilities as a community benefit. Encourage new development to provide on-site childcare facilities rather than paying an in-lieu fees.

High Economic Development and Housing Division (ECD)
Action PR-9.3.5: Coordinate citywide childcare programs. Coordinate and integrate childcare programs with existing housing, community, and social programs as described in the Child Care Master Plan.

High Recreation Division (P&R)
Policy PR-9.4
Action PR-9.4.1: Explore grant funding for childcare. Explore the provision of one-time grants to Family Child Care homes for zoning permit application or to update homes to be ready for babies and toddlers, including removing penalties for those who want to legalize their Family Child Care homes.

High Recreation Division (P&R)
Action PR-9.4.2: Create and maintain online portal for childcare. Create and maintain an online portal and resources for childcare business development. Medium Recreation Division (P&R) 565
238 SHAPE SSF: 2040 GENERAL PLAN

PERFORMANCE METRICS
PERFORMANCE METRIC: Park service ratio
Target
• 3 acres of improved parkland per
1,000 residents,
• 0.5 park acres per 1,000 employees• 1.5 acres of open space per 1,000 residents
• 1.0 acres of joint use open space per
1,000 residents
Data Source Parks inventory, US Census Bureau ACS
Department
Responsible
Parks & Recreation
Target 3.0 Acres

0.5 Acres

1.5 Acres

1.0 Acre
2021 Data 2.4 Acres

2.8 Acres

1.2 Acres

1.2 Acres
Target
2021 Data
Target
2021 Data
Target
2021 Data
Improved Parkland
Improved Parkland, Employees
Open SpaceJoint Use
PERFORMANCE METRIC: Park access PERFORMANCE METRIC: Miles of Trails Target
1 park, trail, open space, or privately-owned public open space within a 10-minute walk (1/2 mile) of residents 2021 DATA:97% OF
Data Source RESIDENTS Parks inventory, US Census Bureau ACS Department
Responsible
Parks & Recreation, Planning Division
Target 15 Miles of trails
2021 DATA:11 MILES OF TRAILS Data Source
Parks and Rec Trail Inventory
Department
Responsible
Parks & Recreation
566
ABUNDANT AND ACCESSIBLE PARKS AND RECREATION 10
239
PERFORMANCE METRIC: Program, Facility, and Maintenance Staffing Target
• 1.0 full time equivalent custodian (porter) per 25,000 square feet
• 1 full time equivalent maintenance staff person(for repairs and system maintenance) per 50,000 square feet of building area (per Facility Manager Pulse) MAINTENANCE STAFF PER 10 ACRES OF PARK AND OPEN SPACE LAND:

Data Source 1 STAFF MEMBER Parks and Rec Operating Budget, Parks Inventory, US Census Bureau ACS Parks and Rec Trail Inventory Department
Responsible
Parks & Recreation
PERFORMANCE METRIC: Percent of Recreational Services Program utilization Target
75% Recreational Services section program utilization (as defined as the number of participants divided by program capacity)

CITY TO BEGIN TRACKING DATA AND PROVIDE
Data Source IN THE FUTURE. Participants in the Recreational Services section, including Aquatics, Classes, Cultural Arts, Childcare, Senior Services, Sports, Rentals, and Special Events.

Department
Responsible
Parks & Recreation
567
Staff Survey: Inform the 2024
Update to the County of Monterey
Health Department Strategic Plan
The updated strategic plan will focus our work over the next three years to continue enhancing, protecting and improving the health of people in Monterey County. The plan will build on existing momentum, identify areas for improvement, and increase coordination and alignment across bureaus. In this update, strategies will focus on department priorities and critical needs. The department will continue providing all mandated services and implementing established programs and strategies although the full breadth and depth of the department’s work will not be explicitly identified in the plan. Furthermore, all Health Department (HD) employees should find that strategies in at least 2 of the 4 goals are relevant to their work.

This anonymous 10-minute survey is an opportunity to
provide your feedback on draft goals and draft strategies.

The survey will close on Wednesday, September 18th.
568
If you would like to be entered into a drawing for ten $50 gift cards, you will have the option to share your email at the end of the survey.

If you provide your email, that data will only be accessible to Raimi + Associates (the independent consulting team facilitating the strategic planning process). Raimi + Associates will delete all contact information once all gift cards have been distributed.
569
Staff Survey: Inform the 2024
Update to the County of Monterey
Health Department Strategic Plan

1. In which County of Monterey Health Department (HD) Bureau do you work?
This information will be used to target follow up emails so that staff in every Bureau provide input.

Administration (including Animal Services and PEP)
Behavioral Health
Clinic Services
Emergency Medical Services
Environmental Health
Public Administrator/Public Guardian
Public Health
Prefer not to answer

2. Which of the following best describes your position in the County of Monterey Health Department?
I am a supervisor and/or manager and/or director
I am not a supervisor, manager, or director
570
Staff Survey: Inform the 2024
Update to the County of Monterey
Health Department Strategic Plan
The County of Monterey Health Department's mission is to enhance, promote, and protect the health of Monterey County individuals, families, communities, and environment.

The draft goals for the County of Monterey Health Department’s 2024-27 Strategic Plan are:

1. Build Resident Power + Partners’ Capacity to Make Our Communities Healthier

2. Provide Exceptional Person-Centered Care through Accessible, CommunityFocused Health Services

3. Invest in Health Department Employees + Strengthen Workforce Capacity

4. Optimize Organizational Effectiveness + Sustainability

3. How much do you agree or disagree with this statement? “The Health Department’s draft strategic plan goal 1, Build Resident Power + Partners’ Capacity to Make Our Communities Healthier, is important to enhancing, protecting, and improving the health of the people in Monterey County.”
Strongly agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
571

4. How much do you agree or disagree with this statement? “The Health Department’s draft strategic plan goal 2, Provide Exceptional Person-Centered Care through Accessible, CommunityFocused Health Services, is important to enhancing, protecting, and improving the health of the people in Monterey County.” Strongly agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly disagree

5. How much do you agree or disagree with this statement? “The Health Department’s draft strategic plan goal 3, Invest in Health Department Employees + Strengthen Workforce Capacity, is important to enhancing, protecting, and improving the health of the people in Monterey County.”
Strongly agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly disagree

6. How much do you agree or disagree with this statement? “The Health Department’s draft strategic plan goal 4, Optimize Organizational Effectiveness + Sustainability, is important to enhancing, protecting, and improving the health of the people in Monterey County.”
Strongly agree
Agree
Disagree
Strongly disagree
572

7. Which of the draft strategic plan goals feel relevant to your role and job responsibilities at the Health Department?
Select all that apply.

Draft goal #1: Build Resident Power + Partners’ Capacity to Make Our Communities Healthier
Draft goal #2: Provide Exceptional Person-Centered Care through Accessible, Community-Focused Health Services
Draft goal #3: Invest in Health Department Employees + Strengthen Workforce Capacity
Draft goal #4: Optimize Organizational Effectiveness + Sustainability None of the draft goals feel relevant to my role/responsibilities

8. Overall, what do you think about the draft strategic plan goals? Please share and be as specific as possible. For example: if you think an additional goal should be added, please specify; if you think a draft goal should be worded differently, please share your recommended language. 573
Staff Survey: Inform the 2024
Update to the County of Monterey
Health Department Strategic Plan
574
The draft strategies to work towards Goal 1 are presented below. Example activities are also presented below to indicate some of the ways that each strategy can be implemented in the next 3 years.

Draft goal #1: Build Resident Power + Partners’ Capacity to Make Our Communities Healthier
Draft Strategies Example Activities

1. 1. Increase priority community
members’ participation in advocating for
healthier communities and in making
decisions for their communities (using
the Spectrum of Community
Engagement to Ownership)
Train Health Department staff at all level in using
the Spectrum of Community Engagement to
Ownership (SCEO)
Institutionalize processes to engage community
members and other stakeholders in program
development and evaluation
Utilize a participatory budgeting process to
address health disparities in communities
disproportionately affected by health inequities

1.2. Engage multi-sector partners to
align resources to advance equitable
policy and systems changes (especially
but not exclusively related to improved
social determinants of health)
Continue to support multi-sector partner-led efforts
to increase structural equity
Continue to engage both governmental and nongovernmental partners in adopting or implementing evidence-based policies to decrease
inequitable injury, illness, and/or mortality
outcomes

1.3. Improve the department’s
dissemination of information to diverse
communities and sectors
Ensure that webpages, publications, and
presentations across the HD utilize culturally
responsive, engaging, and clear communications
best practices
Provide technical assistance on and/or train HD
staff and community partners in current
communications best practices approaches related
to developing clear, culturally responsive
messaging
Gather and implement feedback from community
health workers and promotores to effectively tailor
health promotion information to different
communities
575

9. Overall, what do you think about the draft strategies for goal 1? Are there additional strategies that should be considered? Please share and be as specific as possible. For example: if you think an additional strategy should be added, please specify; if you think a draft strategy should be worded differently, please share your recommended language.

Please also share if you think any activities are critical for successfully implementing a draft strategy.
576
Staff Survey: Inform the 2024
Update to the County of Monterey
Health Department Strategic Plan
577
The draft strategies to work towards Goal 2 are presented below. Example activities are also presented below to indicate some of the ways that each strategy can be implemented in the next 3 years.

Draft goal #2: Provide Exceptional Person-Centered Care through Accessible, Community-Focused Health Services
Draft Strategies Example Activities

2.1. Strengthen the continuum of care to
provide a seamless patient experience
across the County of Monterey Health
System
Clarify and implement a consistent Model of Care
across Health System
Develop and implement a coordinated approach
for Clinic Services and Natividad appointments and
referrals
Continue to implement the Monterey Integrated
System Transformation Initiative (MISTI) to ensure
behavioral health services are coordinated and
welcoming to individuals and families with multiple
complex issues

2.2. Increase accessibility of health
services, especially for underserved
communities
Expand use of bilingual community health workers
to help link adults with health care
Reduce barriers to accessing health care (including
behavioral health care) (e.g., mobile health
services, weekend and evening hours)
Expand range of health services to holistically
support wellbeing available from County of
Monterey Health System and through partnerships

2.3. Maximize preventative clinical care,
early intervention, and timely treatment
to reduce chronic disease burden
Increase access to healthy foods and physical
activity opportunities (e.g., with Market Match
vouchers and Parks Rx program)
Increase utilization of the nutritional counseling
program
Prevent or slow progression of diabetes for people
experiencing health disparities by ensuring that
key health assessments are conducted regularly
(e.g., glycemic status assessments, diabetic eye
examinations, diabetic foot assessments)

2.4. Expand population health initiatives
to improve health outcomes and
promote equity
Continue leveraging population health informatics
to target support for high-need patients and to
support key points in transition of care
Leverage technology to integrate precision
medicine into clinical workflows
578

10. Overall, what do you think about the draft strategies for goal 2? Are there additional strategies that should be considered? Please share and be as specific as possible. For example: if you think an additional strategy should be added, please specify; if you think a draft strategy should be worded differently, please share your recommended language.

Please also share if you think any activities are critical for successfully implementing a draft strategy.
579
Staff Survey: Inform the 2024
Update to the County of Monterey
Health Department Strategic Plan
580
The draft strategies to work towards Goal 3 are presented below.

Draft goal #3: Invest in Health Department Employees + Strengthen Workforce Capacity
Draft Strategies Example Activities

3.1. Attract and retain a highly-skilled
workforce that reflects the diversity of
our community
Recruitment + Hiring Processes
Work with Health Department Human Resources to
streamline the recruitment process and develop
recruitment strategies for hard-to-fill positions
Analyze diversity of staff by classification and
initiate efforts to enhance diversity to reflect
populations served
Compensation + Benefits
Further utilize available programs to assist with
hiring (e.g., loan repayment programs, recruitment
firms, employment bonus, tuition reimbursement
program)
Employee Engagement
Increase staff input and communication between
management and staff
Develop and implement an employee recognition
program

3.2. Continue to support employee
wellbeing
Continue to develop department-wide, traumainformed well-being practices Expand efforts to promote a culture of wellness,
inclusion, and engagement

3.3. Create and implement a workforce
development plan to strengthen staff
skills in key areas
Expand professional development opportunities
related to health equity
Provide training to staff to support integration and
coordination across the County of Monterey Health
System (including across Bureaus)

11. Overall, what do you think about the draft strategies for goal 3? Are there additional strategies that should be considered? Please share and be as specific as possible. For example: if you think an additional strategy should be added, please specify; if you think a draft strategy should be worded differently, please share your recommended language.
581

12. What activities do you think are critical to implement draft strategy 3.1 over the next 3 years?
Draft Strategy 3.1. Attract and retain a highly-skilled workforce that reflects the diversity of our community. Activities will address:

Recruitment + Hiring Processes
Compensation + Benefits
Employee Engagement

13. What activities do you think are critical to implement draft strategy 3.2, Continue to support employee wellbeing, over the next 3 years?

14. What activities do you think are critical to implement draft strategy 3.3, Create and implement a workforce development plan to strengthen staff skills in key areas, over the next 3 years? 582
Staff Survey: Inform the 2024
Update to the County of Monterey
Health Department Strategic Plan
The draft strategies to work towards Goal 4 are presented below. Example activities are also presented below to indicate some of the ways that each strategy can be implemented in the next 3 years.

Draft goal #4: Optimize Organizational Effectiveness + Sustainability Draft Strategies Example Activities

4.1. Reinforce an organizational culture
of continuous improvement and learning
Continue to develop and implement quality
improvement plans
Continue to strengthen the capacity of programs
and employees to advance health equity

4.2. Expand communication and
collaboration across and between Health
Department bureaus and programs, as
well as with other County agencies
Leverage quality improvement initiatives to
improve operations and coordination across the
County of Monterey Health System (including
within and across Bureaus)

4.3. Continue to increase and diversify
revenue to support Health Department
priorities
Secure funding necessary for facility needs critical
to providing person-centered care
Increase capacity to optimize reimbursement for
clinical care
Establish and maintain a Community-Driven Health
Equity Fund to sustain health equity programs and
projects
583

15. Overall, what do you think about the draft strategies for goal 4? Are there additional strategies that should be considered? Please share and be as specific as possible. For example: if you think an additional strategy should be added, please specify; if you think a draft strategy should be worded differently, please share your recommended language.

Please also share if you think any activities are critical for successfully implementing a draft strategy.
584
Staff Survey: Inform the 2024
Update to the County of Monterey
Health Department Strategic Plan

16. We are asking for the following information to help determine how the ways that housing impacts people's health should be addressed within the strategic plan (e.g., as an activity, as multiple activities, as an additional strategy).

Please briefly describe any work your program is currently doing, plans to do, or was recently doing related to housing and/or homelessness. There are many ways you might be addressing these topics, including (but not limited to):

Services for unhoused residents/people experiencing homelessness Services to help people stay housed
Safety of existing housing (e.g., mold)
Tenant protections and/or displacement
Overcrowding
Housing conditions (e.g., kitchen access, weatherization) Construction of new housing
Housing affordability and/or economic opportunities

17. Is there anything else you would like to share?
585
Staff Survey: Inform the 2024
Update to the County of Monterey
Health Department Strategic Plan
Thank you for sharing your
feedback!
OPTIONAL: If you would like to be entered into a drawing for ten $50 gift cards, you can provide your email address
below.

If selected, Raimi + Associates will send a gift card to your email address from Target.com. Your email will only be accessible to Raimi + Associates (the independent consulting team facilitating the strategic planning process). Once all gift cards have been distributed, Raimi + Associates will email all participants who provided an email address but who were not selected and will then delete all contact information in the survey data set. Before analyzing the data, Raimi + Associates will also clean the data to ensure no names have been included in the written comments.

18. If you would like to be entered in the drawing, please provide your full email address.

Please click "Done" below to submit your email
address.

Thank you!
586
Tell Us About Yourself
our vision, our future
Cuéntanos sobre tí
How Long Have You Lived in Ventura?
¿Cuántos años lleva viviendo en Ventura?
1 year or less
1 año o menos
2-5 years
2-5 años
6-10 years
6-10 años
White (Not Hispanic)
Blanco (No Hispano)
Black/African
American
Afroamericano
Asian
Asiático o Asiático
Estadounidense
Native American or
Alaska Native
Indígena de las
Americas o Nativa de
What Best Describes Your Background? ¿Qué mejor describe su identidad étnica o raza? Where In Ventura Do You Live?
¿Dónde en Ventura vive?
11-20 years
11-20 años
Don’t Live in Ventura
No vivo en Ventura
21-30 years
21-30 años
30+ years
30+ años
What Is Your Age Range?
¿Qué es su grupo de edad?
Under 18
Menores de 18
19-24
25-34
35-44
45-64
65-84
85 or older
85 o más
Native Hawaiian or other
Pacific Islander
Nativa de Hawái o otra de las
islas del Pacífico
Middle Eastern or North
African
De Oriente Medio o
Norteafricano
Hispanic, Latino, or
Spanish Origin
Hispano, Latino o Español
Multiracial/Two or More
Ethnicities
Multirracial/Dos o más razas
587
Additional Thoughts our vision, our future
Pensamientos adicionales our vision, our future
What do you love about Ventura?
¿Qué te encanta de Ventura?
What needs to be changed?
¿Qué necesita cambiar?
588
What Is Important To You? our vision, our future
¿Qué te importa?
Priority / Prioridad Vote (pick three) / Voto (elige tres) Mitigate and adapt to the impacts of
climate change
Mitigar y adaptarse a los impactos del cambio
climático.

Promote equity and justice for all people
Promover la equidad y la justicia para todas
las personas.

Improve housing affordability and build a
diversity of housing types
Mejorar la vivienda accesible y construir una
diversidad de tipos de Vivienda
Preserve Ventura’s character while
allowing for growth
Preservar el carácter de Ventura mientras
permitiendo el crecimiento.

Preserve natural areas and open spaces
Preservar las areas naturales y los espacios
abiertos
Support Ventura’s Downtown and
revitalize other commercial areas.

Apoyar el Centro de Ventura y revitalizar otras
areas comerciales.

Support arts, culture and innovation
Apoyar las artes, la cultura y la innovación.

Empower all residents to participate in the
decision-making process
Empoderar a todos los residents para que
participen en el proceso de tome de decisiones
Improve public facilities and services
Mejorar las instalaciones y los servicios
publicos
Promote walking, cycling and transit
Promover la caminata, el ciclismo y el tránsito
589

General Plan Vision Statement
Survey: Summary of Results
April 2022
590
General Plan Vision Survey Summary
1 Survey Overview
The City of Ventura is in the process of updating its General Plan, a long-term vision and policy document that will guide citywide development and growth over the next 25-30 years. A key component of the General Plan is the Vision, which is comprised of three parts: a forward-looking Vision Statement that describes what the community aspires to be in 2050; eleven core values that define the City’s culture and priorities; and a set of strategies to help implement the General Plan.

Over the past year, the General Plan Team has engaged with the community and the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) through online surveys, public workshops, pop-up workshops, and GPAC meetings to discuss visioning. Based on the collaboration and feedback from the myriad of engagement efforts that have taken place, the General Plan Team prepared a draft Vision that was released for public review on March 4, 2022.

From March 4, 2022 through March 21, 2022, the City of Ventura hosted its fourth online survey for the General Plan Update to gauge whether there is general agreement from the community on the draft Vision. The survey was made available in both English and Spanish on the online survey tool, SurveyMonkey. In total, 341 unique responses were recorded (note that not every respondent answered every question). This document summarizes the combined responses of both English- and Spanishlanguage participants.

Demographic Characteristics of Survey
Respondents
Participants were asked several demographic questions during the survey. These questions are intended to help City staff ascertain whether survey respondents generally matched the profile of Ventura and/or whether any groups were over- or underrepresented. Key takeaways are summarized below:
• About half of all survey respondents were familiar with the General Plan Update process and/or had previously engaged with the development of the Vision. • Almost all respondents (92%) are residents of the City of Ventura. • Of all residents who responded, over half (52%) have lived in Ventura for 21 years or more. • People aged 60 and above comprised almost half (46%) of all respondents (compared to a citywide average of 24%).
1 • Homeowners were overrepresented in the survey, making up 80% of all respondents (compared to the citywide average of 54%). Renters were underrepresented, comprising 18% of the responses (compared to the citywide average of 46%). 2 • Non-Hispanic White or Caucasian were overrepresented in the survey, making up two-thirds of all survey respondents (compared to the citywide average of 55%). Hispanic and Latino individuals were the second highest represented group, although they were still underrepresented in the survey (11% compared to the citywide average of 36%).3 1 U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2015-19 2 Ibid.
3 Ibid.
591
Community Visioning Survey Summary
2 Survey Results
Survey participants were asked to rate how well each component of the draft Vision aligned with their aspirations for the future of Ventura. They were also invited to provide written comments and suggestions to improve the Vision Statement, Core Values, and Strategies. Overall, the majority of respondents supported all three components of the draft Vision. Below, the responses to each survey question are discussed.

Vision Statement
Survey participants rated how well the Vision Statement aligned with their vision for the future of Ventura. Over two-thirds of respondents felt that the Vision Statement was either "very aligned" or "somewhat aligned" with their vision for Ventura (70%), while a small percentage was neutral (13%). Only 17% of respondents felt the Vision Statement was either “somewhat unaligned” or “not aligned” with their vision for Ventura.

Survey participants were then asked if they had any suggestions to improve the Vision Statement.

Recurring themes from the comments are summarized below. • Language of Vision Statement seems vague and not action-oriented enough • A significant community challenge not mentioned in the Vision Statement is water conservation/drought and maintaining a sustainable long-term water supply • Acknowledge that the evolution of the city’s physical form requires adequate infrastructure to support development (water, roads, transit services, etc.) and mitigation of impacts (i.e., light/noise pollution)
• Take a firmer stance against overbuilding and high-density development

29.13%

41.34%

12.99% 11.02%

5.51%
Very aligned Somewhat
aligned
Neither aligned
nor unaligned
Somewhat
unaligned
Not aligned
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
How does the General Plan Vision Statement align with
your vision for the future of Ventura?
(254 people answered, 87 skipped)
Figure 1: Vision Statement Feedback
592
General Plan Vision Survey Summary
3 • Prioritize making the City a leader in addressing climate change and protecting natural spaces and native ecosystems/wildlife
• Have more emphasis on public safety/maintaining a safe community • Be more explicit about addressing homelessness and preventing gentrification and displacement
• Be more explicit in prioritizing pedestrians and cyclists and decreasing reliance on cars • Uplift the needs of families, children, seniors, and those who are disabled • Call out and preserve the City’s heritage as an agricultural town Core Values
Next, survey participants were asked to rate how well the Core Values captured their understanding of Ventura’s values. Nearly two-thirds of respondents felt that the Core Values represented their understanding of Ventura's values either "very well" or "well" (64%), while 13% felt neutral. Less than a quarter of respondents felt that the Core Values represented their understanding of Ventura's values either "somewhat well" or "not well” (22%).

Figure 2: Core Values Feedback
Survey participants were then asked if there were any Core Values they would add, remove, or modify.

Recurring themes from the comments are summarized below. • Indicate a level of prioritization for each core value and move higher priority values to the top of the list
• Certain core values could be consolidated (i.e., “Quality of Life” could be combined with “Safety and Health”)
• Add “Sustainability and Resilient Community” as a core value and address climate impacts more explicitly

20.43%

43.91%

13.48% 11.30% 10.87%
Very well Well Neutral Somewhat well Not well
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
How well do the General Plan Core Values represent
your understanding of Ventura’s values?
(233 people answered, 108 skipped)
593
Community Visioning Survey Summary
4 • Address density and type of desired development under “Balanced Growth” • Address food security under “Safety and Health”
Strategies
Finally, survey participants were asked to rate how well the Strategies aligned with their vision for the future of Ventura. Over two-thirds of respondents felt that the Strategies were either "very aligned" or "somewhat aligned" with their vision for Ventura (70%), while 11% felt neutral. About one-fifth of respondents felt that the Strategies were not very representative of Ventura. Specifically, 19% said that the strategies were either "somewhat well" or "not well" (19%) representative of Ventura.

Figure 3: Strategies Feedback
Survey participants were asked if there were any Strategies they would add, remove, or modify.

Recurring themes from the comments are summarized below.

Community Character and Design
• Include strategies for the Waterfront areas and Midtown • Establish design guidelines that preserve the unique/historic character and respect the existing scale of the city's neighborhoods
Environment
• Explicitly call out the need to phase out oil extraction and other polluting industries • Increase educational programming and resident awareness around waste reduction, recycling, composting, and other sustainability issues
• Address reduction of pesticides in agriculture
• Incorporate strategies to protect and enhance biodiversity and wildlife in the city

28.70%

41.70%

10.76% 8.97% 9.87%
Very aligned Somewhat
aligned
Neither aligned
nor unaligned
Somewhat
unaligned
Not aligned
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
How do the General Plan Strategies align with your
ideas for the future of Ventura?
(223 people answered, 118 skipped)
594
General Plan Vision Survey Summary
5 Economy
• Strengthen regional partnerships and coordination with neighboring jurisdictions, the County, and the State
• Include strategies to strengthen tourism in the city
• Address funding needs for public services and programs Access and Mobility
• Identify opportunities for additional transit hubs, such as Downtown • Emphasize decreasing reliance on cars; continue supporting a car-free downtown • Include strategies that explicitly address parking and traffic challenges in the city • Recognize and address the needs of Ventura’s aging population, particularly those who are/could become mobility disabled; more emphasis on providing disabled access to all parks, beaches, and open spaces
Equity and Engagement
• Need more engagement with long-term residents and the agricultural community • Center the needs and experiences of residents
595
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success
East Palo Alto
Neighborhood Action Plan 2019-2024
Vibrant Park: Health Community, 2014. Artists: Mural Music & Arts Project (MMAP) with lead artist Laura Nagle. 596
Acknowledgements
A special thank you goes to the East Palo Alto Champions, Neighborhood Leadership Group participants, and the East Palo Alto City Council!
EPA CCCS Data Collection Champions EPA Alto CCCS Outreach Champions Julian Escalante
Angela Langi
Mele K. Latu
George Stevenson
Samuel Tavera
Carmen Thomas
Lorena Cuffy
RaShida Knox
Lungusu Malonga
Bakari Thompson
Mama Dee Uhila
Luis Vizcardo
Participating Organizations, Programs, & Agencies in CCCS East Palo Alto American Council of Teachers
AMPV
Anamatangi Polynesian Voices
Bayshore Christian Ministries
Canopy
Catholic Charities Youth Club at St. Francis
of Assisi
Champions
Children's Health Council
East Palo Alto Academy
East Palo Alto Academy Foundation
East Palo Alto Library
East Palo Alto Teen Home
Ecumenical Hunger Program
El Concilio of San Mateo County
Family Connections: Redwood City site
Family Resource Center
First 5 San Mateo County
Fresh Approach
Girls to Women
Golf FUNdamentals
Health Connected
HealthRight360
Job Train
Leadership Incorporated
LifeMoves
Live in Peace
Menlo Spark
Nuestra Casa
One East Palo Alto
Rebuilding Together Peninsula
Samaritan House South EPA
San Mateo County Coalition for
Immigrant Rights (SMCCIR)
StreetCode Academy
The Primary School
Youth Empowerment Strategies for
Success (YESS)
Agencies and Organizations Represented on the CCCS Steering Committee Behavioral Health & Recovery Services
Division, San Mateo County Health
Center for Early Learning, Silicon Valley
Community Foundation
Children and Family Services Division, San
Mateo County Human Services Agency
Employment Services, San Mateo County
Human Services Agency
Faith in Action
Family Health Services Division, San Mateo
County Health
First 5 San Mateo County
Foster Youth Advisory Board
Health Plan of San Mateo
Jobs for Youth (Youth Workforce
Investment), San Mateo County Human
Resources
Juvenile Court, San Mateo County
Superior Court
Juvenile Unit, San Mateo County District
Attorney's Office
Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County
Office of Diversity and Equity, Behavioral
Health and Recovery Services Division,
San Mateo County Health
Office of Supervisor Carole Groom
Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center
Private Defender Program, Juvenile
Division (San Mateo Bar Association)

SAMCEDA
San Mateo County Arts Commission
San Mateo County Child Abuse Prevention
Council San Mateo County Housing
Department
San Mateo County Juvenile Justice &
Delinquency Prevention Commission
San Mateo County Library
San Mateo County Office of Education
San Mateo County Parks Department
San Mateo County Probation Department
San Mateo County Youth Commission
Youth Leadership Institute
San Mateo County Children and Youth System of Care (CYSOC) Agencies First 5 San Mateo San Mateo County Human Services Agency San Mateo County Probation Department San Mateo County Health Department San Mateo County Office of Education Mural featured on cover was painted in 2014 by Mural Music & Arts Project (MMAP) with Laura Nagle serving as lead artist. Located in Bell Street Park in East Palo Alto, the mural represents the researched ideas of reclaiming and activating space as well as portrays people activating the park spaces of East Palo Alto. Colors are bursting from people playing sports, games, and music. Families and friends come together to use the space for positive, fun, community building activities. https://www.muralmusicarts.org/about/mural_portfolio.php 597
Contents
ACTION PLAN ........................................................................................................................ 1 AT A GLANCE......................................................................................................................... 1 EAST PALO ALTO CCCS GOALS.......................................................................................................................3 KEY OUTCOMES FOR EAST PALO ALTO CCCS ....................................................................................................3 TOP EAST PALO ALTO STRATEGIES...................................................................................................................3 INITIATIVE OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................... 5 INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................................7 CCCS INITIATIVE BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................8 CCCS FRAMEWORK FOR STRATEGIES .............................................................................................................11 CCCS PLANNING PROCESS ...........................................................................................................................12 COMMUNITY ASSETS + ISSUES ............................................................................................ 17 COMMUNITY ASSETS IN EAST PALO ALTO.......................................................................................................19 COMMUNITY-IDENTIFIED NEEDS AND ISSUES ..................................................................................................24 SYSTEMS-INVOLVED YOUTH IN EAST PALO ALTO.............................................................................................26 COST OF LIVING IN EAST PALO ALTO..............................................................................................................27 STRUCTURAL + INSTITUTIONAL RACISM..........................................................................................................29 EDUCATIONAL ENVIRONMENT ......................................................................................................................30 LACK OF ADULT SUPPORT + SAFE SPACES .......................................................................................................30 NEED OPPORTUNITIES TO HEAL FROM TRAUMA..............................................................................................31 ACTION PLAN ...................................................................................................................... 33 EAST PALO ALTO CCCS GOALS + KEY OUTCOMES ...........................................................................................35 TOP EAST PALO ALTO CCCS STRATEGIES........................................................................................................36 NEXT STEPS................................................................................................................................................38 APPENDICES ........................................................................................................................ 39 ENDNOTES .................................................................................................................................................42 598
[page left intentionally blank]
599
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 1
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success
East Palo Alto
Neighborhood Action Plan 2019-2024

ACTION PLAN

AT A GLANCE
600
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 2
[page left intentionally blank]

601
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 3
East Palo Alto CCCS Goals

1. All SMC children, youth, and families are safe, healthy, resilient, and recognized for their strengths.

2. All SMC children, youth, and families are connected to a larger community and feel supported by family members, friends, and/or other caring adults.

3. All SMC children, youth, and families are engaged in learning and achieve their academic + career goals.

4. All systems in San Mateo County are accessible, coordinated, culturally responsive, promote racial + gender + economic + immigration status equity, and help preserve our diverse community.

Key Outcomes for East Palo Alto CCCS
▪ Decrease youth and children involved in San Mateo County systems ▪ Increase household income and/or reduce costs
▪ Increase community participation in decision-making and decrease structural/institutional racism ▪ Increase educational quality and responsiveness of schools to student needs, interests, and strengths ▪ Increase supportive relationships between children/youth and caring adults, as well as safe spaces ▪ Increase healing opportunities and healthy coping mechanisms Top East Palo Alto Strategies
East Palo Alto Strategies
Tier 1 Strategies
Ensuring that all
children, youth,
and families live in
safe, healthy, and
supportive
environments

1. Expand living wage job opportunities using both policies and programming.

2. Expand implementation of “housing first” approach to keep vulnerable families housed.

3. Provide mental/behavioral health support at schools for students and staff and revise pre-K-12 school policies and practices to keep students in class and learning.

4. Expand alternatives to incarceration especially for transition age youth and the parents/caregivers of children under 18 and increase efforts to ensure that defendants understand their rights and the legal process.

5. Strengthen connections between school staff, students, and parents/caregivers.

6. Increase positive interactions between community members and law enforcement and eliminate police not accountable to EPA residents.

Tier 2 Strategies
Building resilient
children + youth
by expanding
develop-mental
assets

7. Expand the existence and operating hours of safe, affordable/free places, programs, and activities specifically for youth and families with children (especially involving arts and culture).

8. Expand culturally responsive opportunities for children, youth, and parents/caregivers that help them heal from trauma, develop healthy coping mechanisms, and strengthen their sense of belonging to a broader community.

Tier 3 Strategies
Providing
targeted support
to address unmet
needs at key ages

9. Expand subsidized childcare for low-income families (including for infants and toddlers, and with expanded and/or nontraditional hours).

10. Increase resources available to undocumented youth and families (especially related to careers, entrepreneurship, and higher education).

11. Ensure/expand trauma-informed culturally appropriate re-entry care/services (including legal support).

GOALS
602
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 4
[page left intentionally blank]

603
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 5

Community Collaboration for Children’s Success
East Palo Alto
Neighborhood Action Plan 2019-2024

INITIATIVE

OVERVIEW
604
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 6
[page left intentionally blank]

605
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 7
Introduction
The Community Collaboration for Children’s Success (CCCS) initiative is a multi-agency effort that includes San Mateo County Health, Human Services Agency, Juvenile Probation, County Office of Education and First 5, and it represents an exciting opportunity to create better lives for children and youth in San Mateo County. Four targeted neighborhoods are the focus of the CCCS initiative—specific areas within North Fair Oaks/Redwood City (NFO/RWC), South San Francisco (SSF), East Palo Alto (EPA), and Daly City (DC)—because they all have high need among children and youth as well as a high level of youth “planning readiness” (existing organizational and community assets).

For East Palo Alto, the entire City was identified for the focus of this initiative. The City’s boundary is outlined in yellow below, while the dotted line shows the City of East Palo Alto and the neighboring Belle Haven area.

Between January and June of 2019, community members, service providers, educators, law enforcement officers, and other stakeholders in East Palo Alto met and reflected on community input to identify neighborhood issues/needs and assets within the community. Once top issues/needs and community assets were identified, community members then discussed and prioritized strategies to address the top issues to support the success of children and youth in this area. 606
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 8
This document presents the results of the community planning process in East Palo Alto. The East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan has been developed from the CCCS initiative planning and community engagement process, and is organized in the following sections:
▪ CCCS Initiative Background: Describes the place-based, trauma-informed approach as well as explaining the geographic focus of the CCCS initiative.
▪ CCCS Framework: The CCCS framework provides the overarching “buckets” that strategies fall into. ▪ CCCS East Palo Alto Process: Provides a brief overview of the planning and community engagement process and identifies how each component of the Action Plan was developed. ▪ Top East Palo Alto Issues and Assets: Community members and stakeholders identified a longer list of community issues and assets through the extensive community engagement process in East Palo Alto.

The Neighborhood Leadership Group members then prioritized top issues and concerns to address in the Action Plan.
▪ East Palo Alto Action Plan: The goals for the Action Plan are broad and long-term, and provide an overall vision for the work. The strategies were identified and prioritized to address the top issues and concerns.

CCCS Initiative Background
Place-Based Prevention
The Community Collaboration for Children’s Success (CCCS) initiative is a San Mateo County approach to addressing the geographic concentration of large numbers of young people in County systems such as Juvenile Probation, the Human Services Agency’s Division of Children & Families Services, and Behavioral Health and Recovery Services. An analysis of county-level data revealed that across County agencies and programs, a high concentration of young people in these programs and systems were coming from specific geographic areas in the County. With the aim of interrupting this pattern, this initiative focuses community planning efforts in four specific neighborhoods to recognize and address each community’s needs while building on existing community assets. The initiative’s long-term goals are to achieve better outcomes for children and youth and help prevent the circumstances that lead to juvenile justice, child welfare or intensive behavioral health services which can limit young people’s ability to succeed.

The four neighborhoods selected to develop neighborhood action plans for the CCCS initiative were identified because they have both high youth need and high capacity for deep community engagement and participation.

A Youth Need Index and Youth Planning Readiness Index were calculated using agency and community data. To learn more, please visit www.GetHealthySMC.org/CCCS-data. The four neighborhoods that were identified were within North Fair Oaks/Redwood City, South San Francisco, East Palo Alto, and Daly City (the areas in purple in the map below indicate both high youth need and high youth planning readiness). 607
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 9
Inclusive Definition of Children and Youth
For the planning process, children and youth were defined as newborns to 24 years-old.

Engaging Systems-Involved Youth and Families + Recognizing Structural Inequities To ensure that all children and youth who live in San Mateo County are healthy, happy, and resilient, we know that we have to address existing inequities and focus resources where they are most needed. We also recognize that community members are the experts on their communities – which is why this process engaged both community leaders and residents.

Children: 0-17 years old
Youth: up to 24 years old
Although the number of
juvenile cases resulting in
detention has been
gradually decreasing,
racial disproportionalities
have remained consistent.
608
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 10
Data from San Mateo County’s highest intensity systems revealed that not only are there higher concentrations of youth from certain neighborhoods, but also there are higher than proportionate numbers of youth of color.

The planning process intentionally engaged children, youth, and families with direct experience with San Mateo County systems, as well as those who are disproportionately likely to experience traumatic events (e.g., being homeless, witnessing violence, being suspended, having a parent be incarcerated) and become involved with County systems. As is true throughout the United States and across California, children and youth of color in San Mateo County (and especially Black, Latinx/Hispanic, and Pacific Islander children and youth) are more likely than their white peers to be arrested, in foster care, and in poverty. Children and youth of color are also less likely to be able to participate in high quality preschool, graduate high school, meet the requirements to attend a state college, and are more likely to experience poor health outcomes. These racial and ethnic disparities or disproportionalities are maintained by structural and institutional inequities and racism. In order to reduce these disproportionalities, we need to make our institutions, policies, and systems more equitable.

Trauma-Informed Planning
The concept of collective trauma acknowledges that trauma can occur on a community-wide scale as a result of pervasive violence, concentrated poverty, segregation, neglected infrastructure and structural racism.

Community-level lack of trust, disengagement with civic processes, and an absent sense of community ownership are all outgrowths of historic and systemic community-wide trauma. Trauma-informed planning seeks to strengthen power and resilience in communities in the face of pervasive trauma.

In addition to identifying priority strategies that will support children and youth in each neighborhood, the planning process has helped deepen community connections, build trust, and strengthen the skills of residents.

Structural Racism A history and current reality
of institutional racism across all institutions,
combining to create a system that negatively
impacts communities of color.

Institutional Racism Policies, practices, and
procedures that work better for white people
than for people of color, often unintentionally.

Individual Racism Pre-judgment, bias, or
discrimination based on race by an individual.

Institutional Racism
is like the building this
room is in, the policies
and practices that
dictate how we live
our lives.

Structural Racism is
like the skyline of
buildings around us,
all of which interact to
dictate our outcomes.

Individual
Racism
is like the room
we’re all sitting
in, our immediate
context.
▪ Latinx children/youth in
San Mateo County are
3 times as likely to be
in foster care compared
to white children/youth.
▪ Black children/youth in
San Mateo County are
20 times as likely to be
in foster care compared
to white children/youth.
609
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 11
CCCS Framework for Strategies
Based on community member and Steering Committee input during the planning process with the Stage I neighborhoods, the County confirmed that there are many opportunities to provide supports before young people become involved in county systems. To reflect this information, the County developed a framework with 4 Tiers. Tier 1 through 3 includes opportunities before a young person reaches any of the county systems, and Tier 4 outlines opportunities for children and/or youth who are currently involved in county systems. Tier 1 strategies are those that will affect the largest number of children, youth, and their families. Each additional Tier is focused on a smaller and smaller group of people. Tier 4 strategies will impact the smallest number of people, engaging only those children and youth who are engaged in County systems.1 The four Tiers are:

Tier 1: Protective & Healing Neighborhood Places/Spaces. By improving the physical, socio-economic, and educational environment for all community members, Tier 1 strategies increase opportunities for children and youth and reduce the hardships that the most vulnerable children, youth, and families experience. The impact of these strategies is also felt most by disenfranchised residents, who lack the resources to counteract some of the challenges. For example, while middle class families may be able to take time off from work to take children to counseling appointments, low-income families may not be able to afford to lose any income.

Tier 2: Supportive Programming to Build Resilience. Tier 2 strategies support developmental assets in children and youth, which help young people to be resilient when they experience challenges.iFor example, taking on leadership roles and developing positive relationships with caring adults contribute to a young person’s feelings of self-worth and confidence in their abilities.

Tier 3: Targeted 2-Generation Prevention/Early Intervention. By targeting specific services to young people who have been identified at key ages as experiencing multiple challenges without adequate support, Tier 3 strategies seek to prevent crises and the need for more intensive services.

Tier 4: Strategies to Support Systems-Engaged Youth. This planning effort was designed to identify strategies that can prevent young people from entering County systems. Children and youth currently engaged in County systems have access to a range of support services and the leaders of these County systems remain committed to ongoing improvement of these systems to best support youth and their families.
1 In 12 months, approximately 2% of San Mateo County youth are arrested, 1% receive Behavioral Health & Recovery Services from the County, and 0.1% are in foster care.
610
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 12
CCCS Planning Process
The planning process consisted of four main steps: 1) convening the East Palo Alto community, 2) gathering community input from residents of the East Palo Alto neighborhood, 3) prioritizing strategies for the Action Plan, and 4) developing the Action Plan. This process took place between December of 2018 and June of 2019, and was focused on identifying broad goals, exploring community strengths and issues, and prioritizing strategies for the neighborhood.

1. Convene community

2. Gather input

3. Prioritize strategies

4. Finalize neighborhood action plan
December 2018-
May 2019 January-March 2018 April-May 2019 May-June 2019 Tier Framework for Strategies
Tier 4
Tier 3
Providing Prevention
and Early Intervention
Tier 2
Promoting Resilience
Tier 1
Creating Protective and Healing Places
Supporting Systems-Involved
Children, Youth, and Families
611
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 13
The CCCS Planning Process has included:
▪ 4 Steering Committee Meetings: 30 Steering Committee members (representing 25 agencies, departments, commissions, and organizations) participated in 4 meetings and provided extensive feedback on draft strategies between April 2018 and April 2019. The roster of organizations and agencies represented on the Steering Committee is available online. ▪ 4 East Palo Alto Neighborhood Leadership Group (NLG) meetings: Leadership Incorporated worked with Raimi + Associates to engage more than 90 (unduplicated) East Palo Alto community members and stakeholders participated in 4 meetings. These community members represented more than 35 organizations, schools, programs, and government agencies. Community members and stakeholders who attended the 2nd NLG meeting reviewed highlights from the community input process and prioritized the top issues for children and youth in East Palo Alto. Participants at the 3rd and 4th NLG meetings reviewed and prioritized strategies. See the Acknowledgements page for a list of organizations, schools, agencies, and programs that participated in the planning process. 612
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 14
In addition to meeting participation, we worked with CCCS Champions (15 in East Palo Alto) to gather community input through:
▪ 4 Tell Us sessions (small group conversations) with 21 parents/caregivers and 30 youth, ▪ Surveys were completed by 67 parents/caregivers and 130 youth, and ▪ 4 Dream Walls (posters with key questions in English and Spanish on which community members could write or draw responses) with at least 32 respondents.
613
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 15
The East Palo Alto goals, issues/concerns, strategies and outcomes presented in this Action Plan reflect the input and priorities gathered through this extensive community engagement process. We would like to give a very special thank you to all of the parents/caregivers and youth who spent many hours participating in the Neighborhood Leadership meetings as well as gathering surveys and leading Tell Us Sessions with members of their community. The unique information gathered in this community engagement effort demonstrates the extensive community-wide dedication to harnessing and strengthening the potential of the children, youth, and families of East Palo Alto. The aim of this Action Plan is to support that potential to deepen and grow.

Assets
Goals
Strategies
Issues
Community Input
614
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 16
The programs, policies, and systems/environmental changes that were considered to address the top issues in East Palo Alto were identified in the following ways:
▪ By the Neighborhood Leadership Group members.
▪ Through the community input (i.e., surveys, Dream Wall posters, Tell Us sessions). ▪ Through a review of best and promising practices to support children’s success in the following areas:
criminal justice, child welfare, education, and health systems, and from multiple sectors, as well as to address identified top issues in each community.
▪ By CCCS Steering Committee members.

The CCCS Steering Committee reviewed possible strategies over two meetings, providing input related to feasibility, effectiveness in addressing targeted outcomes, impact on equity, and relative cost for implementation.

The top strategies for East Palo Alto were identified through two prioritization activities at the last two meetings of the Neighborhood Leadership Group.

Strategies were prioritized (filtered) if they:
1) Supported multiple priority outcomes,
2) Addressed inequities,
and/or
3) Were supported by the most
Neighborhood Leadership
Group members.

Evidence-based interventions
Evidencebased
interventions
Top Strategies
to Support
Children, Youth,
and Families in
each CCCS
Neighborhood
Suggestions
from
community
members
Best +
promising
practices
615
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 17
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success
East Palo Alto
Neighborhood Action Plan 2019-2024

COMMUNITY
ASSETS + ISSUES
616
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 18
[page left intentionally blank]

617
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 19
Community Assets in East Palo Alto
Community members also identified the following positive qualities of youth and parents/caregivers in the East Palo Alto community.

Qualities of Youth Qualities of Parents and Caregivers
• They help and uplift each other
• Care about their communities and their
families
• Cultural wealth
• Smart, confident, proud
• Love for community
• Caring and loving
• More open to differences
• Come back to the community when they’re
doing well
• They are everything to their kids (chauffeurs,
doctors, etc.)
• Love for children
• Extremely hard working
• Community involvement
• Good neighbors
• Value family and togetherness
• Good parenting
• Diverse
• Strong
• Survivors
The map on the following page presents the locations of community resources that already exist in the East Palo Alto area that support the children, youth, and families who live there. The assets shown here are listed on the following pages.

Youth/Family Assets not co-located at a school site
County Offices
and/or Services
• Adult Probation, Juvenile Probation East Palo Alto, 2415 University Avenue, East Palo Alto • Calfresh Office – East Palo Alto, 2415 University Avenue, East Palo Alto • East Palo Alto Library, 2415 University Avenue, East Palo Alto • Women, Infants, & Children (WIC office), 2120 Euclid Avenue, East Palo Alto Youth and Family
Assets supported
with County
Funding
• Boys & Girls Clubs of the Peninsula, 401 Pierce Road, Menlo Park • Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto (CLESPA), 2117-B University Avenue, East Palo Alto • Family Connections Belle Haven Site, 1391 Chilco Street, Menlo Park • Nuestra Casa, 2396 University Avenue, East Palo Alto
• Live in Peace, 321 Bell Street, East Palo Alto
• One EPA - Sponsored Employment Program (SEP), 903 Weeks Street, East Palo Alto • Ravenswood Family Dentistry, 1807 Bay Road, East Palo Alto • Samaritan House South, 1852 Bay Road, East Palo Alto
Big Lift Preschools
(supported by
County funding)
• East Palo Alto Head Start Center, 1385 Bay Road, East Palo Alto • IHSD, INC - Menlo Park Head Start Center, 419 6th Avenue, Menlo Park, California, 94025 • Laurel Head Start Center, 1019 Laurel Avenue, East Palo Alto • Magnolia Child Development Center, 1425 Bay Road, East Palo Alto Other youth/
family assets
• All Five, 1391 Chilco Street, Menlo Park
• Belle Haven Branch Library, City of Menlo Park, 413 Ivy Drive, Menlo Park • Cooley Landing Education Center, 2100 Bay Road, East Palo Alto • East Palo Alto Family YMCA, 550 Bell Street, East Palo Alto • Leadership Incorporated - Building Capacity for Social Change, 321 Bell Street, East Palo Alto • The Primary School-East Palo Alto, 951 O’Connor Street, East Palo Alto • Ravenswood Family Health Center, 1798 Bay Road, East Palo Alto • Ravenswood Family Health Center at Belle Haven, 100 Terminal Avenue, Menlo Park • Ravenswood Mobile Health Clinic, 1796 Bay Road, East Palo Alto • Stanford Community Law Clinic, 2117 University Avenue, East Palo Alto 618
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 20
LEGEND
Area Public Schools Area Charter Schools Resources that support children, youth, and families
Elementary School
Middle School
Elementary School
Middle School
High School
San Mateo County Offices and/or Services
Asset supported by County funding
Big Lift Preschool (supported by County funding)
Other youth/family asset
619
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 21
Ravenswood City School District Assets co-located at school sites

RCSD Elementary School
RCSD Middle School (6th-8th grade)
Charter Elementary within RCSD
Charter Middle School within RCSD
San Mateo County Offices and/or Services
Big Lift Preschool (supported by County funding)
Youth/family asset supported by County funding
Belle Haven Elementary
415 Ivy Drive, Menlo Park
HSA Family Resource Center, Belle Haven Elementary
Belle Haven Child Development Center
Brentwood Academy
2086 Clarke Street, East Palo Alto
Boys and Girls Club of the Peninsula - Brentwood Academy StarVista Children and Family Resource Center
Costaño Elementary / 49ers Academy, 2695
Fordham Street, East Palo Alto
EPA Charter, 1286 Runnymede Street, East
Palo Alto

EPA Phoenix Academy, 1039 Garden Street,
East Palo Alto
Green Oaks/Chavez Academy, 2450 Ralmar
Street, East Palo Alto
Los Robles Academy, 2450 Ralmar Street, East
Palo Alto

Ronald McNair Intermediate, 2033 Pulgas
Avenue, East Palo Alto
Boys and Girls Club of the Peninsula - Moldaw-Zaffaroni (2031 Pulgas Avenue)
Willow Oaks Elementary, 620 Willow Road,
Menlo Park
Sequoia Union High School District Assets co-located at school sites SUHSD High School
Charter High School within SUHSD
San Mateo County Offices and/or Services
Youth/family asset supported by County funding
EPA Academy, 1050 Myrtle Street, East Palo Alto Boys and Girls Club of the Peninsula - East Palo Alto Academy
Menlo-Atherton High School, 555 Middlefield Road,
Atherton
Youth/Family Assets Not Reflected on Map (including some outside map extent) County Offices and/or Services
• Alcohol & Other Drugs Perinatal Residential--Free at Last:

Malaika House
• California Children's Services, Admin and MTU
• David Lewis Re-Entry Program
• Department of Housing
• Early Childhood Community Team
• Expansion of Outpatient Services
• Healthy Kids Program
• Healthy Living Ambassadors Program
• HealthRight 360 East Palo Alto Outpatient Program
Engaging Positive Actions
• Home Visiting
• Jobs for Youth, Human Resources
• Mental Health Collaboratives
• Office of Supervisor Warren Slocum
• Parenting Project
• Partners for Safe and Healthy Children, Public Health Nurse Program
• Pre to Three/Partners for Safe and Healthy Children Pre-toThree Enhancement • Regional Mental Health Clinics
• School Based Mental Health Team
• Screening and Assessment of Early Onset Mental
Health/BEAM
• Service Connect
• Therapeutic Behavioral Services and Crisis in-home
• Therapeutic Day School Program
• WIC and child abuse screening expansion
• Youth Case Management
620
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 22
Youth/Family Assets Not Reflected on Map (including some outside map extent) Youth and Family Assets supported with County Funding
• Family Connections Menlo Park Site, 1200 O'Brien Dr,
Menlo Park
• JobTrain, Youth Services Special Program, 1200 O'Brien Dr, Menlo Park
• Library Summer Reading Program
• School Resource Officers
• Trauma-Related Interventions
• Youth Mental Health First Aid
Sequoia Union High School District – schools outside map extent • Redwood HS, 1968 Old County Road, Redwood City
• Sequoia HS, 1201 Brewster Avenue, Redwood City
• Woodside HS, 199 Churchill Avenue, Woodside
• Sequoia District Adult School, 3247 Middlefield
Road, Menlo Park
Other youth/family assets
• California Department of Rehabilitation, 800 Menlo
Avenue, Menlo Park
Additional Assets Identified in Community Input or Invited to Participate in CCCS East Palo Alto Neighborhood Leadership Group
City of East Palo Alto
• City of East Palo Alto Parks, Open Space, and Facilities • East Palo Alto Police Department
• East Palo Alto Rent Stabilization Program
• My Brother’s Keeper
Other Local Entities
• Palo Alto University
Community Organizations and Service Providers
• Able Works
• Advantage Black Infant Health Program
• American Council of Teachers
• AMPV
• Ana Matangi Polynesian Voices
• Art in Action
• Art of Yoga
• Bayshore Christian Ministries
• Belle Haven Community Development Fund
• Big Brothers/Big Sisters
• Bread of Life EPA
• BUILD
• Building Futures Now East Palo Alto
• Calico Youth Services
• Canopy
• Child Care Coordinating Council of San Mateo County
(4C’s) of San Mateo County
• Children’s Health Council
• Collective Roots
o Youth Leadership Program
• College Track
• Community Overcoming Relationship Abuse (CORA)
• Downtown Streets Team
• Early Learning and Care Trust Fund
• East Palo Alto Boxing Club
• EPA Can Do
• East Palo Alto Community Farmers Market
• East Palo Alto Greyhounds
• East Palo Alto Junior Golf Club
• East Palo Alto Senior Center
• East Palo Alto Teen Home (EPATH)
• Ecumenical Hunger Program (EHP)
• Brighter Day Youth Program
• Edgewood
• El Concilio of San Mateo County
o Shelter Network
• EPA Center Arts
• EPATT
• Felton Institute
• Foundation for a College Education (FCE)
• Free At Last: Community Recovery And Rehabilitation
Services (Free At Last)
• Fresh Approach
• Fresh Lifelines for Youth (FLY)
• Friends of the Palo Alto Junior Museum & Zoo
• Girls to Women
• Golf FUNdamentals
• Habitat for Humanity Greater SF
• Hack the Hood
• HAP-Y Program
621
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 23
• Health Connected
• International Institute of the Bay Area
• Kaiser Permanente
• LifeMoves
• Live in Peace
o Gap Year Project
o Students Who Achieve Greatness / Students
With Amazing Goals (SWAG)
• Menlo Spark
• The Morton Center
• Multicultural Counseling and Educational Services of the Bay Area
• Mural Music & Arts Project (MMAP)
• New Creation Home Ministries
• One East Palo Alto
o Behavioral Health Advisory Group Ambassador
Team (BHAGAT)
• Onetta Harris Community Center
• Palo Alto Unified School District
o Foundation for a College Education (FCE)
• Pangea Legal Services
• Participatory Defense
• Peninsula Bridge
• Peninsula Family Services (PFS)
• Project Change @ College of San Mateo
• Project K.E.Y.S. Inc.
• Project WeHOPE
• Ravenswood Youth Athletic Association (RYAA)
• The Real Community Coalition – Justice runs org
• Rebuilding Together Peninsula
• Renaissance Entrepreneurship Center
• Rosalie Rendu Center
• Rotary Club of East Palo Alto Bayshore
• Salvation Army EPA
• Samaritan House South EPA
• San Mateo County Unions Trade Pre-Apprenticeship
Program
• Second Harvest Food Bank
• Service League of San Mateo County
• Seventh-Day Adventist Church
• Spark
• Spatial History Project
• StarVista
• St. Francis of Assisi
o Catholic Charities Youth Club
• StreetCode Academy
• Teen Therapy Center of Silicon Valley
• Thrive Alliance
• Viva Verde
• Year Up
• Youth Community Service
• Youth Empowerment Strategies for Success (YESS)
• Youth Leadership Institute (YLI)
• Young Life
• Youth United for Community Action (YUCA)
Additional Assets Identified in Community Input
• Barbershop Boys
• DEPA
• Mac Center
• Menlo Kids Club
• Poly Program
• RDC
• EHD
• GEPA
• Facebook
• Target
• Green Street
• GBT
• Eastside
• Mama Dee
• EPA BHAG
• Cassy
• Seneca

622
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 24
Community-Identified Needs and Issues
Community input gathered from the surveys, small group conversations, and meetings generated a long list of issues and concerns (presented below and on the following page). Neighborhood Leadership Group members prioritized concerns, which were then summarized into the five top issues for children and youth in East Palo Alto. Issues that came up most consistently in the community input are indicated in bold.

Identified
by youth
Identified by
parents +
caregivers
Issues Identified in Community Input Top Issues
✔ ✔
Youth, families aren’t able to afford rent or cost of living / Too much gentrification and displacement
Housing costs, high
cost of living, and
lack of living wage
job opportunities
(and lack of
opportunities to build
needed
skills/knowledge
needed to get living
wage jobs)
✔ ✔
Not enough opportunities to develop skills and connections to get living wage jobs (e.g., in tech)
✔ ✔ Not enough education about entrepreneurship, financial, or work skills ✔ ✔ Not enough affordable, local daycare and other childcare ✔ ✔ Not being able to afford college or get scholarships (including for undocumented youth)
✔
Families living in overcrowded conditions because they can’t afford housing otherwise
✔ Families not having financial stability
✔ Eligibility thresholds (e.g., free lunch, rental subsidies) are too low ✔ Youth have to work to contribute to the family instead of focusing on school
NLG addition Not enough affordable housing
✔ ✔
Parents and caregivers cannot spend enough time with their children because 1) they work long hours/have multiple jobs to afford rent and other basics and/or 2) spend so much time in traffic/commuting Lack of adult support
(often due to parents
needing to work
multiple jobs and
because of long
commutes) and safe
spaces
✔ ✔
General safety concerns, feeling the neighborhood and/or local park is not safe
✔ ✔ Gangs
✔ ✔ Not enough mentors
✔ ✔ Not enough spaces in free afterschool and summer programs/activities ✔ ✔ Too much bullying
✔
Not enough safe community spaces where youth and families can spend time (e.g., community centers, playgrounds, skate parks, movie showings)
✔ No respite center for youth
✔ No LGBT center for youth
NLG addition
Not enough support for positive relationships between parents and their kids (youth)
✔ Racial inequities, structural racism (e.g., available resources, being policed by neighboring affluent communities)
Lack of community
empowerment +
inclusion, especially
in decision-making /
Structural +
institutional racism
(especially related to
educational and career
opportunities and
interactions with law
enforcement)
✔ Too much use of detention and suspension instead of other responses (e.g., restorative justice, meditation)
✔ Curricula are not diverse, culturally relevant, and/or interactive enough ✔ Wage gap
✔ ✔ Dealing with discrimination and being stereotyped
✔ ✔
Youth are tracked based on where they are from, are given limited academic/educational opportunities
623
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 25
Identified
by youth
Identified by
parents +
caregivers
Issues Identified in Community Input Top Issues
✔ ✔ Schools are under resourced, lack equipment and opportunities Mismatch between
current educational
environment and
what children +
youth need to learn
and succeed
academically (from
early childhood
education to postsecondary)
✔ ✔
Education is not high quality / Elementary and middle schools don’t prepare students for area high schools
✔ ✔
Limited exposure to enrichment opportunities contributes to youth not being motivated (because they don’t have opportunities that interest or motivate them and because their friend/social groups are not motivated)
✔ ✔ Not enough skilled/knowledgeable school counselors
✔ ✔ Youth aren’t supported/encouraged, adults don’t have high expectations for them
✔ ✔ Not enough tutoring support/opportunities
✔
High teacher turnover (teachers don’t have as much experience, don’t know available resources, there aren’t consistent people in children/youth’s lives)
NLG addition
Not enough education related to useful and important skills like critical thinking, strategic planning, how to make money in the U.S. ✔ ✔ Dealing with past and current trauma
Dealing with past
and current trauma
without adequate
support and/or
culturally responsive
opportunities for
healing (or to learn
healthy coping
mechanisms)
✔ ✔ Domestic/family violence
✔ ✔ Too much drug use (including vaping/juuls) and drinking among youth ✔ ✔ Youth who have mental health issues are not identified or connected to help
✔ ✔ Family stress
✔
Youth don’t have adequate coping mechanisms so use drugs to deal with stress and mental health issues (e.g., anxiety, depression) ✔
Not enough support for youth experiencing mental health issues that do not meet criteria of “serious mental illness,” there is not enough mental health support in neighborhoods/locally
NLG addition Home environment can be unsafe (even if “stable”) ✔ ✔ Not enough jobs available for youth and/or paid internships, especially in summer
Issues/Needs that
Were Not Prioritized
by Neighborhood
Leadership Group
Members
✔ ✔
Too many barriers to youth having supportive relationships and interactions with other community members/Lack of a sense of belonging due to physical environment (e.g., not enough sidewalks, neighbors don’t know one another); phones and social media; and because displacement disconnects young people from their community and their culture
✔ Not enough healthy food
✔
Not enough alternatives to arrests/incarceration (diversion programs or early interventions)
✔ Not enough support for community members in reentry from jail/prison/detention
✔
Youth and parents do not know what their rights are or how to get legal help (e.g., related to immigration, police, jobs)
✔ Too many programs have underqualified (and/or
undertrained/supported) mentors and staff
✔ Police don’t have training in (or focus on) de-escalation ✔ Youth/families do not know about existing resources/services ✔ Procrastination and poor time management
✔ Low school attendance
✔ Too much peer pressure/ “bad influences”
624
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 26
Systems-Involved Youth in East Palo Alto
The CCCS focus area for East Palo Alto overlaps the Ravenswood City Elementary School District and includes the entire city of EPA and Belle Haven in Menlo Park.
ii The analysis that identified the “high youth need” areas in San Mateo County included a range of indicators, including where youth clients of the County’s Behavioral Health & Recovery Services and Juvenile Probation live.

High Youth Need High Youth Planning Readiness
Youth who live in East Palo
Alto are dramatically
overrepresented in San Mateo
County systems. Even though
only 5% of youth who live in
the County reside in East Palo
Alto, 14% of the clients under
18 served by the County’s
Behavioral Health & Recovery
Services live in EPA—and 1 out
of 5 youth who are on Juvenile
Probation live in East Palo Alto.

The geographic area where
strategies may be
implemented will vary slightly depending on the strategy (for example, a school-based intervention might use the attendance area for an elementary school and a policy might be adopted by a City Council). The maps below present the school districts that serve children and youth living in East Palo Alto and Belle Haven. As is presented on the left, the Ravenswood City Elementary School District is very similar to the area identified by 5%
14%
20%
0%
10%
20%
San Mateo County youth
(under 18) who
live in East Palo Alto
SMC Behavioral Health &
Recovery Services
youth clients (under 18)
who live in East Palo Alto
SMC Juvenile Probation
clients (under 18) who
live in East Palo Alto
Percent of Youth Who Live in East Palo Alto
625
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 27
the County as having a high level of youth need (see yellow area on map on the previous page) serves). The Sequoia Union High School District (right) covers a much larger geographic area, extending to and beyond the CCCS focus area in North Fair Oaks/Redwood City.

Area Elementary School Districts High School District for East Palo Alto Cost of Living in East Palo Alto
Many youth and parents/caregivers emphasized their struggles to meet basic needs because of the high cost of living. This challenge is compounded by the limited opportunities residents have to obtain living wage jobs. 24%of youth said their family
has frequently been unable to
afford basic necessities (e.g.,
medicine, clothes, transportation).
22%of youth reported that their
family has experienced housing
instability.

Kids don't have the opportunities others have
because they live in low-income communities.

East Palo Alto youth
Residents who have lived here more than 10
years should receive financial assistance.
626
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 28
Between 2000 and
2015, the median rent
in East Palo Alto
increased dramatically
in some areas.

Source: Urban Displacement Project <UrbanDisplacement.org/RentChangeMap> What gets in the way
of children and youth
(0-24) who live in East
Palo Alto being
healthy, happy, and
successful in the
future?
La economía, día a día esta área está poniendo reta y
precios muy altos. Hay programas que por los limites
de ingresos no califican para bajo costo la cual no es
justo porque aunque sea por el book su ingreso "alto"
las renta y la vida es cara en esta zona.

Translation: Day by day the economy in the area is
increasing rents and prices. There are people who don't qualify for programs due to the low income eligibility
threshold and it is unjust because rent and prices keep increasing in this area.

East Palo Alto youth
627
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 29
Structural + Institutional Racism
Many community members identified historic
and ongoing structural racism as being a
significant barrier to children and youth
success in East Palo Alto. In Tell Us sessions,
surveys, and Neighborhood Leadership Group
meetings, East Palo Alto youth shared their
experiences being racially profiled by police
from Menlo Park, Atherton, and other parts
of San Mateo County. Many people also
noted the connections between residential
segregation, economic inequities, and school
funding/resources, and how these limit the
educational attainment and career
opportunities for youth in East Palo Alto.

Neighborhood Leadership Group members
also identified that institutional racism was
often maintained because community
members have limited opportunities (or
relevant knowledge and capacity) to
participate in community decision-making.

Racial disparities in suspensions are one example of institutional racism (due to both policies and implicit biases). Youth who are suspended are less likely to succeed academically and more likely to be involved with the criminal justice system. As can be seen below, African American students are disproportionately suspended compared to their peers in other racial/ethnic groups within both Ravenswood City Elementary and Sequoia Union High School Districts. In Sequoia Union High School District (which includes East Palo Alto, Menlo Park, Atherton, Woodside, North Fair Oaks, and Redwood City), Hispanic/Latino and Pacific Islander students are also disproportionately suspended compared to other racial/ethnic groups. 6% 0%
83%
8%
1% 1%
12%
1%
80%
6% 0% 1%
African
American
Asian Hispanic or
Latino
Pacific
Islander
White Two or
More
Races
Ravenswood City
Elementary School District
% of student body % of students suspended
3% 8%
47%
2%
35%
4% 2% 4%
68%
6%
16%
2%
African
American
Asian Hispanic
or Latino
Pacific
Islander
White Two or
More
Races
Sequoia Union
High School District
% of student body % of students suspended
What gets in the way of children and youth
(0-24) who live in East Palo Alto being
healthy, happy, and successful in the future?
Lack of opportunity.

Wage gap.

Gentrification.

Discrimination.

The education that they receive. If more money
were to go to the schools and the teachers were
to receive better pay, [the students] would be
more likely to have a better future.
# effects of redlining
People judge the children
just because they live in EPA.

East Palo Alto
youth
East Palo Alto
parent/caregiver
Source: DataQuest, California Department of Education, data from school year 2017-2018. Data for American Indian/Alaska Native students and Filipino students are suppressed for Ravenswood to protect student privacy. 628
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 30
Educational Environment
Community members frequently identified limited
educational opportunities, resources available to local schools and students, and low expectations related to educational achievement as being major barriers to children and youth success in East Palo Alto. Neighborhood Leadership Group members also noted that the educational environment in
East Palo Alto is disconnected, being comprised of both elementary and high school districts (Ravenswood and
Sequoia Union, respectively) as well as charter schools. Youth (via surveys) and NLG members (in meetings) also reported that children are not adequately prepared to succeed in high schools outside of East Palo Alto (e.g., Menlo-Atherton, Sequoia, Woodside), and that curricula should reflect local history or students’ diverse history. Youth also noted that because schools have limited resources, staff and teachers are not necessarily able provide adequate support for all students or recognize every student’s strengths.

NLG members emphasized that there are
insufficient resources invested in the
education system from early childhood
education to post-secondary schools.

They also noted that while most
teachers and staff are dedicated to
doing their best, they have limited
capacity to help children and youth with
high needs (especially those who live in
poverty and those who have experienced
trauma).

Lack of Adult Support + Safe Spaces
Both in the survey and in Tell Us Sessions, young people talked about not having supportive adults in their lives, often noting that their parents spend most of their time working. They also expressed that there are not many places for them to go outside of school hours where they feel safe and are able to participate in activities.

East Palo Alto
parents and caregivers
[We need]
college
courses closer
to EPA.
[Youth are left] behind when they go to other schools [for example, transitioning from an EPA middle school to
Menlo-Atherton High School].
[We don’t have enough] resources to help youth become
qualified to work in the peninsula high tech companies.

East Palo Alto youth
[We need] better school
counselors and better
disciplinary options. [There are
also] not enough interactive
programs.

Schools have
low
expectations
[for students]
and kids don't
think they can
[be successful].
[We need to
change] why
students are
suspended/
expelled.
629
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 31
52%of youth survey respondents reported that they have “never” or “rarely” talked to a supportive adult (for example, a parent, teacher, mentor) about what they are thinking or feeling.
13%of youth survey respondents reported that that they “rarely” or “never” feel safe. Another 17%reported that they only feel safe “sometimes.” Need Opportunities to Heal from Trauma
Survey respondents identified traumatic events (including experiencing domestic violence or homelessness) and youth drug use as barriers to youth success. Neighborhood Leadership Group members recognized the relationship between mental health issues, experience with traumatic events and chronic stressors, and substance use. They clarified that East Palo Alto youth who use drugs or drink alcohol typically do this because they have not developed or did not have the support required to utilize healthy coping mechanisms. Survey respondents identified the need for more community-based mental health services and NLG members emphasized the need for more culturally responsive opportunities in which youth and family members can heal from trauma and develop healthy coping mechanisms.

East Palo Alto
parent/caregivers
EPA lacks sidewalks
which prevents
communities from
taking walks, coming
together and seeing
neighbors, and
building neighborhood
communities.

We need a safe and
local place for youth
(providing tutoring,
sports, community +
teaching life skills)!
Money – rent is too high, so kids' parents are too
busy trying to survive to spend time with them.

East Palo
Alto youth
[We need] childcare services open later so
parents can work to support their children
[while their children are safe and supported].
[It would be great to have an] art space for
shows, classes, for all generations (Talent
shows). It [would] help youth to learn from
their elders/adult artist mentors.
31% of youth reported
frequently being unable to
handle it when things
haven’t gone their way
without hurting themselves
or other people (for
example, without hitting or
calling someone names).
630
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 32
[The barriers to success
for children and youth
in East Palo Alto
include] drug use in
families and not enough
mental support in
neighborhoods.
[EPA youth need] DRUM HEALING GROUPS for the YOUTH and
Families Healing from TRAUMA and ABUSE, enhanced visitation/for family visits to happen in their own community… or just respecting the child's needs and wishes of not wanting to be near their abuser.

Youth get overstressed
and start doing drugs.

They need to make the schools

TRAUMA INFORMED
in East Palo Alto.

East Palo Alto
parents and caregivers
Mental health/trauma
[should be assessed] during a
special education evaluation.

East Palo
Alto youth
631
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 33
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success
East Palo Alto
Neighborhood Action Plan 2019-2024

ACTION PLAN
632
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 34
[page left intentionally blank]
633
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 35
East Palo Alto CCCS Goals + Key Outcomes
The goals for the CCCS focus area in East Palo Alto represent the community’s vision of children and youth success. These goals were identified and reviewed over three Neighborhood Leadership Group meetings and updated based on community feedback.

1. All SMC children, youth, and families have affordable, stable housing and living wage jobs or successful businesses.

2. All SMC children, youth, and families are safe, healthy, resilient, and recognized for their strengths.

3. All SMC children, youth, and families are connected to a larger community and feel supported by family members, friends, and/or other caring adults.

4. All SMC children, youth, and families are engaged in learning and achieve their academic + career goals.

5. All systems in San Mateo County are accessible,
coordinated, culturally responsive, promote
racial + gender + economic + immigration status
equity, and help preserve our diverse
community.

The key outcomes for the CCCS area in East Palo Alto point to the changes the community is aiming for as a result of addressing the issues identified as the most important for local children and youth. ▪ Decrease youth and children involved in San Mateo County systems ▪ Increase household income and/or reduce costs
▪ Increase community participation in decision-making and decrease structural/institutional racism ▪ Increase educational quality and the responsiveness of schools to student needs, interests, and strengths

GOALS KEY CCCS

OUTCOMES

TOP EAST PALO ALTO

CCCS STRATEGIES
634
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 36
▪ Increase supportive relationships between children/youth and caring adults, as well as safe spaces ▪ Increase healing opportunities and healthy coping mechanisms Top East Palo Alto CCCS Strategies
The process to develop the East Palo Alto CCCS Action Plan involved community members prioritizing strategies for the East Palo Alto neighborhood area to best support children and youth success. The table below presents the final set of strategies that were prioritized for implementation in the East Palo Alto neighborhood area. The table includes strategies organized by Tier and indicates which outcomes each strategy will help achieve.

Footnotes include citations related to the effectiveness of each strategy. Each strategy can be implemented at the neighborhood level, though the exact geography may be slightly different for each strategy (for example, a school-based strategy might focus on a single school, mentoring might focus on youth who live within the “high need” and “high planning readiness” area. See the Appendices for additional information on how these strategies might be implemented at a small geographic scale.

East Palo Alto Strategies
Key Outcomes
Decrease
children/
youth
involvement
in County
systems
Increase
household
income
and/or
reduce
costs
Increase inclusion
in decisions +
Decrease
structural/
institutional
racism
Increase
educational
quality and the
responsiveness of schools
Increase
supportive
adult
relationships
+ safe spaces
Increase
healing
opportunities
+ healthy
coping
mechanisms
Tier 1 Strategies
Ensuring that all children, youth, and families live in safe, healthy, and supportive environments

1. Expand living wage job opportunities using
both policies and programming.iii, iv,v,vi, vii ✔ ✔ ✔

2. Provide mental/behavioral health support at
schools for students and staff and revise preK-12 school policies and practices to keep students in class and learning.viii,ix,x,xi,xii,xiii
✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

3. Expand alternatives to incarceration
especially for transition age youth and the
parents/caregivers of children under 18 and
increase efforts to ensure that defendants
understand their rights and the legal
process.xiv,xv,xvi
✔ ✔ ✔

4. Strengthen connections between school staff,
students, and parents/caregivers.xvii,xviii,xix ✔ ✔ ✔

5. Increase positive interactions between
community members and law enforcement
and eliminate police not accountable to EPA
residents.xx,xxi,xxii,xxiii,xxiv
✔ ✔
635
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 37
East Palo Alto Strategies
Key Outcomes
Decrease
children/
youth
involvement
in County
systems
Increase
household
income
and/or
reduce
costs
Increase inclusion
in decisions +
Decrease
structural/
institutional
racism
Increase
educational
quality and the
responsiveness of schools
Increase
supportive
adult
relationships
+ safe spaces
Increase
healing
opportunities
+ healthy
coping
mechanisms
Tier 2 Strategies
Building resilient children + youth by expanding developmental assets

6. Expand the existence and operating hours of
safe, affordable/free places, programs, and
activities specifically for youth and families
with children (especially involving arts and
culture).xxv, xxvi
✔ ✔ ✔

7. Expand culturally responsive opportunities for
children, youth, and parents/caregivers that
help them heal from trauma, develop healthy
coping mechanisms, and strengthen their sense
of belonging to a broader
community.xxvii,xxviii,xxix
✔ ✔ ✔
Tier 3 Strategies
Providing targeted support to address unmet needs at key ages

8. Expand implementation of “housing first”
approach to keep vulnerable families
housed.xxx,xxxi ✔ ✔ ✔

9. Expand subsidized childcare for low-income
families (including for infants and toddlers,
and with expanded and/or nontraditional
hours).xxxii,xxxiii,xxxiv
✔ ✔ ✔

10. Increase resources available to undocumented
youth and families (especially related to
careers, entrepreneurship, and higher
education).xxxv,xxxvi
✔ ✔ ✔

11. Ensure/expand trauma-informed culturally
appropriate re-entry care/services (including
legal support).xxxvii,xxxviii,xxxix ✔ ✔ ✔

636
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 38
Next Steps
This Action Plan is a community call to action! It presents the input of many community members from the East Palo Alto neighborhood and is an important and bold step to ensure children and youth success in East Palo Alto. It builds on local strengths and presents a menu of key strategies to address local issues and priorities. The aim of the Action Plan is to inspire action, invite public and private collaboration, encourage alignment among local organizations, and ensure continued community involvement. By identifying multiple strategies in a range of areas (or Tiers), the Plan presents a roadmap to children and youth success, and—in the name of the hundreds of community members who participated—is an invitation to harness local community assets and strengths to implement the strategies presented here. To kick off implementation in the East Palo Alto neighborhood, San Mateo County will explore how existing investments can better address the prioritized issues and ways to support implementing all four CCCS neighborhood action plans.

The following indicators will be used to track the effects of strategies that are implemented.

Key Outcomes Indicators
Fewer children and youth
involved in high-intensity
County systems
▪ Number of children and youth in foster care, on Juvenile Probation, and/or receiving BHRS services
▪ Length of time children/youth are engaged in high-intensity County systems Increased income ▪ Median household income for households with children and youth ▪ Percent of families with children below 300% Federal Poverty Level Decreased costs for families
with children/youth
▪ Number of low-income children and youth participating in subsidized or free summer and/or afterschool enrichment activities
▪ Number of subsidized childcare/preschool slots
More community participation
in decion-making
▪ Percent of students who report helping decide things like class activities and rules
Less structural and
institutional racism
▪ Level of racial/ethnic disparities, especially in suspension rates, arrest rates, and academic outcomes (e.g., graduation rate, percent of students at/above standard in specific subjects)
Higher educational quality
and increased responsiveness
to student needs, interests,
and strengths
▪ Percent of students reporting a high level of school connectedness (California Healthy Kids Survey school connectedness index)
▪ Ratio of students to pupil support service personnel
▪ Percent of students meeting or exceeding California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP) grade level standards in English Language Arts and Mathematics
More supportive relationships
between children/youth and
caring adults
▪ Percent of students reporting a high level of parent involvement (California Healthy Kids Survey parental involvement index)
▪ Percent of students who have positive relationships with teachers or other adult at school (California Healthy Kids Survey caring adults index) More mental health support
and opportunities to heal
from trauma
▪ Percent of children who are resilient (whose parents report they are “calm and in control” when facing a challenge)
▪ Percent of students reporting (by grade level) who missed school in past month because of feeling very sad, hopeless, anxious, stressed, or angry Less substance use ▪ Percent of students who have used drugs or alcohol in past month ▪ Percent of students who are currently heavy drug/alcohol users In addition to the Neighborhood Action Plans, the CCCS Steering Committee will be identifying county-wide systems level strategies to advance the overall initiative goals and align with the local work. 637
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 39
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success
East Palo Alto
Neighborhood Action Plan 2019-2024

APPENDICES
638
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 40
[page left intentionally blank]

639
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 41
Type of Strategy Top Strategies to Support Children + Youth in East Palo Alto Tier 1 Strategies
Ensuring that all children,
youth, and families live in
safe, healthy, and
supportive environments

1. Expand living wage job opportunities using both policies and programming (e.g., increase minimum wage, mandate paid time off, provide opportunities for low-wage earners to develop skills and networks to get higher-paying jobs, create new positions (e.g., navigators) that prioritize hiring of lower-income residents with deep community connection, incentivize businesses to train local workers for management positions and to promote from within).

2. Expand implementation of “housing first” approach to keep vulnerable families housed (e.g., with a focus on Transitional Age Youth and families with minor children).

3. Provide mental/behavioral health support at schools for students and staff (e.g., support for teachers in developing/implementing behavior plans for students instead of keeping them out of class; professional development opportunities for teachers related to trauma, mental health, and substance use) and revise pre-K-12 school policies and practices to keep students in class and learning (e.g., using on-campus suspensions with focused academic support, restorative justice practices instead of punishment).

4. Expand alternatives to incarceration especially for transition age youth and the parents/caregivers of children under 18 (e.g., community service instead of detention or GPS monitoring) and increase efforts to ensure that defendants understand their rights and the legal process.

5. Strengthen connections between school staff, students, and parents/caregivers.

6. Increase positive interactions between community members and law enforcement (e.g., community meetings, opportunities for children to meet officers, having officers prioritize de-escalation) AND eliminate police not accountable to EPA residents.

Tier 2 Strategies
Building resilient children
+ youth by expanding
developmental assets

7. Expand the existence and operating hours of safe, affordable/free places, programs, and activities specifically for youth and families with children (especially involving arts and culture).

8. Expand culturally responsive opportunities for children, youth, and parents/caregivers that help them heal from trauma, develop healthy coping mechanisms (e.g., meditation/mindfulness, evidence-based curricula to teach socialemotional skills and self-regulation), and strengthen their sense of belonging to a broader community.

Tier 3 Strategies
Providing targeted
support to address unmet
needs at key ages

9. Expand subsidized childcare for low-income families (including for infants and toddlers, and with expanded and/or nontraditional hours).

10.Increase resources available to undocumented youth and families (especially related to careers, entrepreneurship, and higher education).

11. Ensure/expand trauma-informed culturally appropriate re-entry care/services (including legal support).
640
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 42
Endnotes
i Search Institute (2007). “41 Developmental Assets.” Project Cornerstone, a YMCA of Silicon Valley Initiative. <https://www.ymcasv.org/projectcornerstone/html/developmentalassets.html> ii Community Collaboration for Children’s Success data analysis, 2017. iii Stillwell-Parvensky, M., Noel, J. (2016) “Ending Child Poverty: Local Approaches for California.” Children’s Defense Fund California. <https://www.cdfca.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2016/10/ending-child-poverty-now-california.pdf> iv Hochberg, S. (2016) “Raising the Minimum Wage and Fighting Wage Theft for a Healthier San Mateo County.” Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto (CLSEPA). <https://clsepa.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/CLSEPA-Report-Wage-Theft-in-San-Mateo-County-June-2016.pdf> v Reich, M., Jacobs, K., Bernhardt, A. (2014) “Local Minimum Wage Laws: Impacts on Workers, Families, and Businesses.” Institute for Research on Labor and Employment. <http://irle.berkeley.edu/files/2014/Local-Minimum-Wage-Laws.pdf> vi Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2012) “Youth and Work: Restoring Teen and Young Adult Connections to Opportunity.” Annie E. Casey Foundation. <https://www.aecf.org/m/resourcedoc/AECF-YouthAndWork-2012-Full.pdf> vii Ross, M., Moore, K.A., Murphy, K., Bateman, N., DeMand, A., Sacks, V. (2018) “Pathways to High Quality Jobs for Young Adults.” Metropolitan Policy Program at Brookings. <https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Brookings_Child-Trends_Pathways-for-High-Quality-Jobs-FINAL.pdf> viii Institute of Education Sciences. (2016) “Functional Behavioral Assessment-based Interventions.” U.S. Department of Education. <https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED572042.pdf>
ix O’Connell, M.E., Boat, T., Warner, K.E. (2009) “Preventing Mental, Emotional, and Behavioral Disorders Among Young People: Progress and Possibilities.” National Academies Press. <https://www.integration.samhsa.gov/integrated-care-models/IOM_Report_on_Prevention.pdf> x
ChangeLab Solutions (2019). “School Discipline Practices A Public Health Crisis and an Opportunity for Reform.” <https://changelabsolutions.org/sites/default/files/SchoolDisciplineAndPublicHealth-IssueBrief-FINAL-20190128.pdf> xi Advancement Project, American Federation of Teachers, National Education Association, and National Opportunity to Learn Campaign (2014). “Restorative Practices: Fostering Healthy Relationships & Promoting Positive Discipline in Schools. A Guide for Educators.” <https://advancementproject.org/resources/restorative-practices-fostering-healthy-relationships-promoting-positive-discipline-in-schools/> xii
Osher, D., Fisher, D., Amos, L., Katz, J., Dwyer, K., Duffey, T., & Colombi, G.D. (2015) “Addressing the Root Causes of Disparities in School Discipline: An Educator’s Action Planning Guide.” National Center on Safe Supportive Learning Environments. <https://safesupportivelearning.ed.gov/sites/default/files/15-1547%20NCSSLE%20Root%20Causes%20Guide%20FINAL02%20mb.pdf> xiii
Kostyo, S., Cardichon, J., Darling-Hammond, L. (2018) “Making Essa’s Equity Promise Real: State Strategies to Close the Opportunity Gap.” Learning Policy Institute. <https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/sites/default/files/product-files/ESSA_Equity_Promise_REPORT.pdf> xiv Tallon, J., Labriola, M., and Spadafore, J. (2018) Creating Off-Ramps: A National Review of Police-Led Diversion Programs. New York: Center for Court Innovation. <https://www.courtinnovation.org/sites/default/files/media/document/2018/Creating_Off_Ramps.pdf> xv The Center for Health and Justice at TASC (2013). No Entry: A National Survey of Criminal Justice Diversion Programs and Initiatives. Chicago. <http://www2.centerforhealthandjustice.org/sites/www2.centerforhealthandjustice.org/files/publications/CHJ%20Diversion%20Report_web.pdf> xvi The Models for Change Juvenile Diversion Workgroup: Center for Juvenile Justice Reform, National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice, National Juvenile Defender Center, National Youth Screening and Assessment Project, and Robert F. Kennedy Children’s Action Corps (2011). Juvenile Diversion Guidebook. <http://www.modelsforchange.net/publications/301/Juvenile_Diversion_Guidebook.pdf> xvii Biglan, A., Van Ryzin, M.J., Hawkins, J.D. (2017) “Evolving a more Nurturing Society to Prevent Adverse Childhood Experiences.” Oregon Research Institute. <https://www.academicpedsjnl.net/article/S1876-2859(17)30148-1/pdf> xviii Darling-Hammond, L., Cook-Harvey, C.M. (2018) “Educating the Whole Child: Improving School Climate to Support Student Success.” Learning Policy Institute. <https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/sites/default/files/product-files/Educating_Whole_Child_REPORT.pdf> xix Harper, K., Temkin, D. (2019) “Responding to Trauma Through Policies that Create Supportive Learning Environments.” Child Trends. <https://www.childtrends.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/RespondingTraumaPolicyGuidance_ChildTrends_January2019.pdf> xx Mentel, Z. (2012). Racial Reconciliation, Truth-Telling, and Police Legitimacy. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. <https://www.nccpsafety.org/assets/files/library/Racial_Reconciliation__Police_Legitimacy.pdf> xxi Gill, C., Weisburd, D., Telep, C.W. et al. (2014) Community-oriented policing to reduce crime, disorder and fear and increase satisfaction and legitimacy among citizens: a systematic review. Journal of Experimental Criminology (2014) 10: 399. <https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-014-9210-y> xxii Stein, R. E., & Griffith, C. (2017). Resident and Police Perceptions of the Neighborhood: Implications for Community Policing. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 28(2), 139–154. <https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403415570630> xxiii Leroux, EJ, McShane, K. Changing youth attitudes toward the police through community policing programming. Journal of Community Psychology. 2017; 45: 810– 822. <https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.21894> xxiv Kane, E., Evans, E., and Shokraneh, F. (2018). “Effectiveness of current policing-related mental health interventions: A systematic review.“ Criminal Behavior and Mental Health, Volume 28 (2). <https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/cbm.2058> xxv Afterschool Alliance (2014). Taking a Deeper Dive into Afterschool: Positive Outcomes and Promising Practices. <http://afterschoolalliance.org/documents/deeper_dive_into_afterschool.pdf> xxvi Kremer, K., et al (2015) “Effects of After-School Programs with At-Risk Youth on Attendance and Externalizing Behaviors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” J Youth Adolesc, 44 (3). <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4597889/pdf/nihms723883.pdf> xxvii Jones, S., and Kahn, J. (2017). “The Evidence Base for How We Learn: Supporting Students’ Social, Emotional, and Academic Development.” Consensus Statements of Evidence From the Council of Distinguished Scientists. The Aspen Institute National Commission on Social, Emotional, and Academic Development. <https://assets.aspeninstitute.org/content/uploads/2018/03/FINAL_CDS-Evidence-Base.pdf?_ga=2.27262205.1736255608.1553798812- 306611706.1545153072>
xxviii Mager, U., Nowak, P. (2012) “Effects of Student Participation in Decision Making at School: A Systematic Review and Synthesis of Empirical Research.” Educational Research Review. <https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1747938X11000479> xxix Horton, M.H., Montgomery, P. (2012) “Youth Empowerment Programs for Improving Adolescents’ Self-Efficacy and Self-Esteem: A Systematic Review.” Research on Social Work Practice. <https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1049731512459967> 641
Community Collaboration for Children’s Success East Palo Alto Neighborhood Action Plan Prepared by Raimi + Associates 43
xxx Collins, C. et al. (2019). “Implementing housing first with families and young adults: challenges and progress toward self-sufficiency.” Children and Youth Services Review, Volume 96. <https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0190740918304675> xxxi United States Interagency Council on Homelessness (2016). “Ending Family Homelessness, Improving Outcomes for Children.” <https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0190740918304675> xxxii Schumacher, K (2017). “Enrollment in Subsidized Child Care and Development Programs Varies by Race and Ethnicity.” <https://calbudgetcenter.org/resources/enrollment-subsidized-child-care-development-programs-varies-race-ethnicity/> xxxiii Henly, J.R., and Adams, G. (2018) “Insights on Access to Quality Child Care for Families with Nontraditional Work Schedules.” Washington DC: Urban Institute. <https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/99147/insights_on_access_to_quality_child_care_for_infants_and_toddlers_0.pdf> xxxiv Henly, J.R., and Adams, G. (2018) “Insights on Access to Quality Child Care for Infants and Toddlers.” Washington DC: Urban Institute. <https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/99148/insights_on_access_to_quality_child_care_for_families_with_nontraditional_work_schedul es_0.pdf>
xxxv Gilbert, A. and Quintana Hess, J. (2015) “Best Practices for Supporting Undocumented Students.” Arlington VA: National Association for College Admission Counseling. <https://www.nacacnet.org/globalassets/call-to-action-blocks/professional-development/webinars/nacacundocumentedstudents.pdf> xxxvi Stegelin, D.A. (2017) Strategies for Supporting Immigrant Students and Families: Guidelines for School Personnel A National Dropout Prevention Center/Network White Paper.” Clemson SC: National Dropout Prevention Center/Network at Clemson University. <http://dropoutprevention.org/wpcontent/uploads/2017/10/supporting-immigrant-students-and-families-2017-10.pdf> xxxvii Dion, R. et al (2018) Trauma-Informed Approaches for Programs Serving Fathers in Re-Entry: A Review of the Literature and Environmental Scan A Special Topics Study of the Parents and Children Together Evaluation. Washington DC: Mathematica Policy Research for Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. <https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/pact_rf_tic_lit_review_final_508.pdf> xxxviii Ramirez, R. (2016) “National Resource Center on Justice Involved Women: Reentry Considerations for Justice Involved Women.” <https://cjinvolvedwomen.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Reentry-Considerations-for-Justice-Involved-Women-FINAL.pdf> xxxix Schiraldi, V., Western, B., and Bradner, K. (2015) “Community-Based Responses to Justice-Involved Young Adults.” New Thinking in Community Corrections (1). Laurel MD: U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs. <https://www.hks.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/centers/wiener/programs/pcj/files/ESCC-CommunityBasedResponsesJusticeInvolvedYA.pdf> 642
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.1

EAST PALO ALTO

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
DATE: December 3, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Melvin E. Gaines, City Manager
BY: Amy Chen, Community & Economic Development Director Elena Lee, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Adoption of RBD / 4 Corners Final Specific Plan and Final SEIR Recommendation
Adopt a resolution:

1. Certifying that the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (FSEIR) has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA);

2. Adopting a Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Plan pursuant to Public Resources Code 21000 and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000);

3. Adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations;

4. 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;

5. Approving General Plan Amendment (GP24-001) for associated amendments consistent with the Specific Plan; and
Adopt an ordinance:

6. Waive the first reading and introduce an ordinance approving the Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners Specific Plan, a specific plan consistent with CA Government Code Sections 65450-65457; and

7. Waive the first reading and introduce an ordinance amending Article 2 (Zones, Allowable Uses and Development Standards) of Chapter 18 of the East Palo Alto 643
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.1
Municipal Code (Development Code) consistent with the RBD Specific Plan (ZC24- 002).

Alignment with City Council Strategic Plan
This recommendation is primarily aligned with:

Priority: Promote Housing, Economic and Workforce Development Priority: Promote Health & Public Safety
Priority: Ensure Our Financial and Organizational Health Executive Summary
In support of the above recommendation, this staff report:

1. Summarizes Changes made to Public Draft SEIR (that were incorporated into Final SEIR).

2. Summarizes Key Changes made to the Public Draft Specific Plan, including:
a. Changes made in response to comments received at the September 25, 2024 Council Study Session.
b. Changes made to implement and ensure consistency with the City’s Adopted Sixth Cycle Housing Element.
c. General Plan and Development Code amendments.

3. Lists Changes made to the Zoning Map (and the APNs of all parcels changed).

Background
Location/ APN: Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners Specific Plan Area Existing Use: Various uses
General Plan Designation: Corridor, High-Density Residential, Industrial Buffer, General Industrial, Low-Density Residential, Medium Density
Residential, Mixed-Use High, Parks/Recreation/Conservation, Public/Institutional, Urban Residential
Zoning: Single-Family Residential, Parks and Recreation, Public Institution, 4 Corners, Bay Road Central, Industrial Transition, Industrial Flex Overlay, Ravenswood Employment Center,
Urban Residential, Waterfront Office
Surrounding Zoning: North: City of Menlo Park
East: Resource Management
South: Medium-Residential Density Subzone 1, MediumResidential Density Subzone 2, Mixed-Use Corridor 644
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.1
Subzone 1, Multiple Family High-Density Residential
Subzone 5, Public Institution, Urban Residential
West: Medium Residential Density Subzone 2, Single-Family Residential,
Flood Zone: AE, X
CEQA Status: A Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) has been prepared and was circulated for a 46-day review,
consistent with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The public review period was from July 26 to September 10, 2024. A Final EIR was prepared and released in November 14, 2024
Public Notice: The full notice was also published in the Palo Alto Daily News on November 8, 2024. The public was also provided
notification of the NOA and public hearing through an email notification from the City’s project contact database, which includes residents and stakeholders. Additionally, the agenda and staff report were posted on the City’s website and on bulletin boards located at City Hall at 2415 University Avenue, East Palo Alto and also at 1960 Tate Street, East Palo Alto.

Process to Date
In September 2020, the City Council recommended exploring a focused amendment to the Ravenswood Business District / 4 Corners Specific Plan (“Specific Plan”) and Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (“SEIR”). The Specific Plan and SEIR update analyzed the impacts of increasing the amount of office and research and development (R&D) space and housing in the Specific Plan area. The key objectives for the Specific Plan update were to evaluate the relative impacts and benefits of allowing more office/R&D square footage and define policies that address: 1) traffic congestion and trip reduction; 2) wet utility infrastructure; 3) fiscal impacts; 4) indirect displacement and housing affordability; and 5) local jobs, while articulating a clear framework with community benefits. The Specific Plan and Final SEIR, including the Specific Plan and FSEIR errata sheets, can be found on the project website:
 https://www.cityofepa.org/planning/page/rbd-specific-plan-update.

To date, the City Council has held 12 public meetings or study sessions to discuss the Specific Plan Update, with the following timeline:
 The Public Draft Specific Plan was released on April 5, 2024.  Study session on the release of the first 11 draft chapters of the Specific Plan on April 25, 20241. The City Council was asked to provide feedback and initial comments on the Draft 1 April 25, 2024 City Council Study Session: https://d3n9y02raazwpg.cloudfront.net/cityofepa/60dc50cd-d800- 11ee-98bb-0050569183fa-3408cd31-ecd7-4429-9d91-65986d552499-1713985397.pdf 645
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.1
Plan at this meeting. The formal public comment period for the Specific Plan ran through July 26, 2024.
 Study session on the release of the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) on July 25, 20242.
 The public draft of the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (DSEIR) related to this project was released on July 26, 2024.
 Public comments accepted during a 46-day review period through September 10th.

At a Council Study Session on July 25, 2024, staff received recommendations on two issues:
 Council considered removal of Loop Road from the list of required improvements in the Specific Plan and the Capital Improvements Program/Transportation Impact Fee, due to a combination of concerns about neighborhood impact, environmental impact, and constructability. Note that discussion of the Loop Road remains in the FSEIR as part of the proposed project, however the draft of the Specific Plan proposed for approval in Attachment 4, does not include this component.
 Council directed staff to add a policy to monitor/track the total square footage of industrial development in the Plan Area, but not to outright limit it.

At the Council Study Session on September 24, 20243, staff received the following proposal from the Council for future consideration:
 Provide a draft of the Specific Plan with Growth Scenario 2, permitting up to 3.35 million square feet of office/R&D space, 300,000 square feet of industrial space, and 1,600 housing units. These revisions have been included in the draft of the Specific Plan included in Attachment 4.
 Consider additional changes to the Community Benefits and Implementation chapters of the Plan, to address specific concerns articulated at the session.

Analysis
Summary of CEQA Project Impacts and Findings
The Draft and Final SEIR found that all impacts would be mitigated to a less-than-significant level with implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, with the exception of Air Quality, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions, 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.

With implementation of mitigation measures, the Specific Plan Update would result in less-thansignificant impacts to Aesthetics, Construction Air Quality, Construction Noise, Cultural Resources, Tribal Cultural Resources, Energy, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation, 2 July 25, 2024 City Council Study Session: https://d3n9y02raazwpg.cloudfront.net/cityofepa/0b769671-d804- 11ee-98bb-0050569183fa-3408cd31-ecd7-4429-9d91-65986d552499-1721950477.pdf 3 September 24, 2024 City Council Study Session: https://d3n9y02raazwpg.cloudfront.net/cityofepa/9ba08654- d814-11ee-98bb-0050569183fa-3408cd31-ecd7-4429-9d91-65986d552499-1726790468.pdf 646
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.1
and Utilities and Service Systems, as shown in Table 2 below. Resources listed as less-thansignificant or no impact do not require mitigation. Resource areas requiring mitigation are further described in this section.

There was no impact to Agricultural and Forestry Resources, Mineral Resources, or Wildfire.

Table 2: Resource Area Impact Summary
Less-than-Significant or No
Impacts
Less-than-Significant
Impacts with Mitigation
Significant and
Unavoidable Impacts
 Aesthetics
 Agricultural and Forestry
Resources
 Construction Air Quality
 Construction Noise
 Cultural Resources
 Energy
 Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
 Hydrology and Water
Quality
 Land Use
 Mineral Resources
 Population and Housing
 Public Services
 Recreation
 Tribal Cultural Resources
 Transportation
 Utilities And Service
Systems
 Wildfire
 Biological Resources
 Geology and Soils
 Noise
 Air Quality
 Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Significant and Unavoidable Impacts
Significant and Unavoidable impacts were observed for Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Noise for this project. The large scale of proposed project – i.e., the Specific Plan – causes impacts that exceed key CEQA thresholds. These are expected impacts from large-scale Bay Area specific planning efforts and are commonly found acceptable in consideration of the project benefits for any project of significant scale. For comparison, the Adopted 2013 Plan also causes significant and unavoidable impacts to Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions.

Less-than-Significant Impacts
Future projects under the Specific Plan Update would be required to comply with the City’s General Plan, applicable regulations, proposed Specific Plan Update Policies and Standards, thresholds, and regional plans, resulting in less than significant impacts. 647
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.1
Aesthetics, Hazardous Materials, Hydrology, and Water Quality, and Land Use Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, and Land Use would have similar impacts as they would be required to: a) implement policies that require the cleanup of contaminated sites, and b) not physically divide an established community and comply with a land use plan/policy/regulation adopted to avoid or mitigate an environmental effect. Policies require that future developments prepare Phase I ESAs, Site Management Plans, and other relevant documents to investigate and address soil and groundwater conditions. For aesthetics, the project could result in additional light and glare however, would be required to comply with Specific Plan standards for lighting and Parks Master Plan’s lighting standards to reduce the impact to less than significant.

Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources
New development would result in the same impacts to cultural resources and tribal cultural resources, given that these resources are part of the existing environmental conditions and the same amount of redevelopment of existing uses, e.g., building demolition and ground disturbance, would occur. Significant impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level with the implementation of proposed Specific Plan Update Policies.

Population and Housing
The Specific Plan Update will result in a higher population than the 2013 Specific Plan; however, the Specific Plan Update would be consistent with Plan Bay Area 2050 goals for growth, whose population growth projections are based in part on recent census data. This Specific Plan Update exceeds the population growth studied under the 2035 General Plan, but are consistent with the goals for redevelopment of the Plan Area and improving the City’s jobs/housing balance.

Public Services and Recreation
The Specific Plan Update would result in a higher demand for public services and recreation than the 2013 Scenario. With the payment of impact fees for schools, public facilities, and parks and compliance with the City’s parkland goals, both scenarios would result in a less than significant impact (as would the Adopted 2013 Plan).

Energy
The Specific Plan Update would be required to comply with CALGreen, current building codes, construction best management practices, TDM Measures and therefore would result in a wasteful/inefficient consumption of energy.

Transportation
The Specific Plan Update under which development would need to comply with the City’s TDM Ordinance, would result in less than significant VMT impact because of improved transit service in the future, the future residents of the Specific Plan Area would experience higher transit usage.

Utilities and Service Systems
648
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.1
The demands from the Specific Plan Update could be met with identified CIP projects (planned for through implementation of the Nexus Study/Capital Improvement Projects funded by impact fees or individual developer obligations). Developers would pay impact fees that represent their fair share contribution toward implementing improvements to meet the demands.  The Specific Plan Update combined with the General Plan buildout would result in the City slightly exceeding its contractual wastewater treatment capacity of 2.89 million gallons per day for average dry weather flow and 3.33 million gallons per day for average annual flow.

The SEIR identifies the EPASD/City will have to obtain additional treatment capacity from the Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plan (PARWQCP) to allow for buildout of cumulative growth Based on the City of Palo Alto’s General Plan, at least 5 MGD of capacity at the PARWQCP will exist by 2062. Under Scenario 1, the City would require

0.06 MGD of additional treatment capacity rights and under Scenario 2, the City would require 0.24 MGD of additional treatment. This represents a small percentage of the regional plant’s total future treatment volume.

Less-than-Significant Impacts
With implementation of mitigation measures, the 2013 Specific Plan and Specific Plan Update would result in less than significant impacts to Biological Resources, Construction Air Quality, Construction Noise, and Geology and Soils.

Biological Resources and Geology and Soils
These resource areas would have similar less than significant impacts with mitigation incorporated for the 2013 Specific Plan and Specific Plan Update Scenarios 1 and 2, given these resources are part of the existing environmental conditions and the ground level footprint/disturbance will not be greater. Mitigation is included to protect the salt marsh harvest mouse and salt marsh wandering shrew to reduce impacts to less than significant.

Construction Air Pollutant Emissions and Construction Noise The Specific Plan Update could result in more construction emissions and noise compared to the 2013 Specific Plan. However, mitigation such as use of Tier 4 equipment and electric equipment for air quality would reduce emissions and adherence to construction hours and the installation of noise barriers for noise, would reduce impacts to sensitive receptors to less than significant for all scenarios.

Noise
The one instance in which the SEIR’s impact conclusions was changed pertains to the roadway noise impacts that would result from future traffic generated by Plan buildout. The DSEIR concluded that there was a significant impact at Bay Road, University Avenue to Clarke Avenue and Clark Avenue to Pulgas Avenue segments, due to the traffic noise increase from the buildout of the Specific Plan Update compared to the existing traffic noise levels in the Specific Plan area.

Mitigation Measure MM NOI-2.1 included installation of quieter pavement and the implementation traffic calming measures to reduce traffic noise impacts from the Specific Plan Update buildout.

Based on the roadway noise survey and pavement analysis, it was concluded that the installation of quieter pavement along the affected Bay Road segments would reduce noise levels by five 649
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.1
dBA and would, therefore, reduce the traffic noise impact at these segments to a less than significant level. The Mitigation Measure MM NOI-2.1 was updated in the Final SEIR and the conclusion regarding the Specific Plan Update buildout roadway noise impact was changed to less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Final SEIR
Following the conclusion of public comment period, the City of East Palo Alto prepared a Final SEIR in accordance with Section 15132 of the CEQA Guidelines. The Final SEIR was published on November 14, 2024. Two erratas have been prepared for the Final SEIR. Links to both are included with this staff report. The first Final SEIR errata was posted on the City's project website on November 21, 2024. A second Final SEIR errata, with an additional handful of minor changes, was posted on the project website on November 26, 2024. The purpose of the errata is to document several additional text revisions to the Draft SEIR that were inadvertently omitted from the Final SEIR. The text revisions are similar in nature to text revisions included in the Final SEIR pertaining to changes in the impact conclusion related to traffic noise generated by the Specific Plan Update buildout and to correct other typographical errors.

A copy of the Final SEIR is available at the RBD Specific Plan Update webpage:
 https://www.cityofepa.org/planning/page/rbd-specific-plan-update Twenty-three (23) public comment letters were received from individuals and agencies during the Draft SEIR’s 46-day public review period. The comments include some of the following topics below:
 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
 Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
 Tsunami Design Zone
 Geologic and Seismic Hazards
 Contaminated Sites and Contaminants
 Hydrology
 Construction-related impacts
 Noise Sensitive Land Uses
 Aesthetics
 Biological Resources
 Sea Level Rise
 Recreation
 Native American Cultural Monitoring
All comments were responded to in the Final SEIR4 and clarifying text revisions were made where necessary. An errata sheet is also included to correct typographical errors.

Summary of Changes to the Draft SEIR
The Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (Draft SEIR) for the Ravenswood/4 Corners 4 Draft SEIR Comments:
https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/16201/appendix_a_rbd_seir_public_co mment_ltrs_july-sept._2024.pdf
650
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.1
Business District Specific Plan Update (RBD Specific Plan Update) circulated from July 26, 2024 to September 10, 2024. The Final SEIR has been prepared and includes a list of Draft SEIR recipients, responses to public comments from agencies, organizations and individuals, and Draft SEIR Text Revisions. The Draft SEIR Text Revisions primarily include minor updates and clarifications to the Draft SEIR and mitigation measures, which do not change the SEIR’s impact conclusions, with the exception of one instance discussed below.

The one instance in which the SEIR’s impact conclusions were changed pertains to the roadway noise impacts that would result from future traffic generated by Plan buildout. Draft SEIR Page 280 concluded there was a significant impact on Bay Road, University Avenue to Clarke Avenue and Clark Avenue to Pulgas Avenue segments, due to the traffic noise increase from the buildout of the Specific Plan Update (Scenarios 1 and 2, with and without the loop road) compared to the existing traffic noise levels in the Specific Plan area. Mitigation Measure MM NOI-2.1 included installation of quieter pavement and the implementation traffic calming measures to reduce traffic noise impacts from the Specific Plan Update buildout.

Draft SEIR Page 281 concluded that installation of quieter pavement could reduce noise levels by two (2) to three (3) A-weighted decibel (dBA). However, at the time the Draft SEIR was prepared, the feasibility of installing quieter pavement along the impacted Bay Road segments was unknown. Therefore, it was concluded that the impact of the traffic noise from the Specific Plan Update buildout would be significant and unavoidable.

At the City Staff’s direction, Illingworth & Rodkin (the City’s noise consultant) completed a noise survey and pavement analysis of the affected Bay Road segments on August 22, 2024, to determine if the installation of quieter pavement would reduce the traffic noise impact to a less than significant level. Based on the roadway noise survey and pavement analysis, it was concluded that the installation of quieter pavement along the affected Bay Road segments would reduce noise levels by five dBA and would, therefore, reduce the traffic noise impact at these segments to a less than significant level.

The Mitigation Measure MM NOI-2.1 was updated in the Final SEIR and the conclusion regarding the Specific Plan Update buildout roadway noise impact was changed to less than significant with mitigation incorporated. In addition, based on discussions with the Menlo Park Fire Department, implementation of traffic calming measures such as speed bumps could affect the Fire Department’s response times. In discussions with Planning and Public Works staff, the City is confident that, with the additional analysis performed by Illingworth & Rodkin, installing quieter pavement along the impacted Bay Road segments is a feasible mitigation measure. Given that the installation of quieter pavement would reduce traffic noise levels to less than significant, the implementation of traffic calming measures at the Bay Road segments would not be required.

Therefore, traffic calming measures were removed from Mitigation Measure MM NOI-2.1.

In addition, the Draft SEIR text was revised in the Final SEIR to clarify that on September 25, 2024, the City Council discussed the greater benefits of Scenario 2 (which includes more intense development compared to Scenario 1). Thus, the Final SEIR includes Draft Text Revisions to the Summary and Project Description sections to reflect Scenario 2 as the preferred project scenario; however, the SEIR continues to provide a full analysis of both Specific Plan Update scenarios. 651
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.1
Summary of Key Changes to the Public Draft Specific Plan5 Chapters 1 through 4, Introduction, Community Engagement, Existing Conditions, and Vision and Strategies
 No substantive changes.

Chapter 5, Land Use Policy
 Addition of policies to reflect revised or new mitigations and other impact findings in the FSEIR:
o Updated requirements pertaining to archeological, tribal cultural, and historic resources (including required outreach to tribes).
o Additional details on practices related to known contaminants of concern triggered by earthwork activities, and safe use of imported soils. o Standards relating to asbestos and lead-containing paints. o Requirements to meet EPA Tier 4 standards for particulate matter emissions in generators.
o Reflecting CalGreen Tier 2 Electric Vehicle parking requirements and solid waste diversion requirements.
o Applicants proposing development of projects within 1,000 feet of existing sensitive receptors are required to prepare site-specific construction Health Risk Assessment.
o Incorporating FAA and Palo Alto Airport ALUCP standards relating to noise, glare, and avian-attracting landscaping.
o Policy detailing required fair share contributions towards installation of quiet pavement on Bay Road.
o Requirement to conduct project-specific indoor acoustic analysis.

Chapter 6, Land Use Development Standards
 Revisions to allowed land use table to offer additional flexibility while minimizing impacts to neighbors and biological resources:
o R&D and Industrial (Manufacturing & Production) is Permitted by right; AUP is required if use is proposed adjacent to residential uses or the bay o Mini-storage is permitted with CUP in Industrial Transition and REC o Allowing non-profit uses within Urban Residential to accommodate current and future uses. A footnote will describe an exception that “other uses such as community-supporting/non-profit uses and certain light industrial uses such as distribution and repair may be allowed if they are compatible and do not impact nearby residences”
o Addition of new residential use category of “Corporate Housing” which is allowed with a CUP in Four Corners and Bay Road Central. Corporate Housing is fully furnished temporary housing, usually occupied for 30+ days, accompanied by full range of services.
5 https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/16201/rbdspu_finalplan_tracked.pdf 652
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.1
o Maintenance & Repair allowed as a time-limited Special Use Permit (SUP) in Waterfront Office zone
o CUP for duplex in Four Corners and Bay Road Central
o AUP for ground-floor Multifamily in Four Corners/Bay Road Central  Clarify that a Parking Facility/Structure as an accessory use to another permitted use is allowed by right
 Various updates to ensure that standards are Objective as required by state law. (qualifying residential projects - e.g. SB35 and SB330-compliant projects - shall be approved and expedited if meeting objective design standards).  Reducing or softening certain requirements for Base Tier projects, in recognition of their lower density character:
o Active Frontage requirements are modified (no use requirements, only active design treatments for high levels of façade transparency and frequent entrances). Public space may be substituted for entrances. o Minimum Building Massing and Required Breaks/Articulation. o Maximum Building Lengths increased for Base Tier.
o Maximum Paving coverage (increased in most zones including WO, REC, and Four Corners). Additional flexibility will be offered to projects utilizing permeable paving.
o Limited surface parking is allowed in front setbacks in REC, WO, and Industrial Transition (with appropriate screening and/or landscaping).  Removal of frontage across from City Hall along University Ave from Active Frontage diagram
 Revision of required internal active frontages from 3 to 2 on Four Corners site.  Rooftop Equipment Standards
o Rooftop equipment facing a marsh shall adhere to the 1:1 setback requirement if it is located in a levee stepback zone
o Rooftop equipment that exceeds the maximum area coverages shall be counted towards building maximum height limits
o Noting that rooftop equipment is subject to the City’s Noise Ordinance  Additional performance standards prohibiting loading /delivery activities facing the marsh/Baylands after 8pm, to be adjusted on a case-by-case basis.

Chapter 7, Parks, Open Space and Public Facilities
 Open Space Network diagram revised to show more conceptual locations for future public plazas.
 Clarifying that Table 7-1 is a conceptual estimate for future parks/plaza acreage, not a mandatory minimum size. Revision of estimated size of POPOS at Four Corners to 0.35 acres. Revision of open space shown on Figure 7-1 at Four Corners to show a single rectangle (rather than two).
 Revisions to reflect the correct name of the Don Edwards Preserve and an additional policy to require closer coordination with the Preserve. 653
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.1  Deletion of one of the minimum dimensions from Non-Residential Open Space (retaining a single minimum dimension of 30 feet) and reduction of minimum area to 1,000 square feet.
 No new trees will be permitted in native marsh or wetlands, only in constructed or filled parks and open space areas. New landscaping shall be compatible with marshlands ecology.
 Requirement to add landscaping or other screening to any surface parking facing (and/or adjacent to) the marsh/wetlands to ensure that parked vehicles are not able to cast their headlights onto the wetlands.

Chapter 8, Mobility
 Revisions to the Transportation Demand Management (TDM) section:
o Elimination of the district-wide trip cap (i.e., the responsibility for reducing trips does not fall on the Transportation Management Association (TMA) but rather on individual projects); reversion to project-by-project requirements and penalties. o Each new project will have an individual TDM plan.
 TMA is required to be formed before issuance of first major non-residential Building Occupancy permit. TMA is required to meet regularly. o Removal of most details related to implementation of the TDM Ordinance, to be moved to a separate TDM Implementation Guidelines document. o Clarification that a shuttle program is not a mandatory or required element of the TDM program, but one option available to meet TDM goals, consistent with the menu of options included in the TDM program. Private shuttles are not prohibited but are encouraged to be open to the public.
 Clarified that the City will accept four-way signalized intersection improvements in lieu of the two previously proposed roundabouts (formerly identified as required at Tara & Bay and Pulgas & Emerson East-West Connector)
 Revision to the maximum parking ratio for R&D uses from 2.5 up to 3.0, to maintain competitiveness with other cities and reduce neighborhood spillover. Removal of the midpoint parking reduction and addition of vehicle parking reductions as a potential qualifying Community Benefit.
 Update to the Mobility map to de-emphasize a specific location for Street A within the Four Corners property.
 Footnote added to Transit network map to reflect that ‘conceptual shuttle stop locations’ are subject to agreement with project applicants/property owners. Standard and Exemplary Tier projects are expected to provide at least one shuttle stop on site, specific location to be determined during Development Agreement discussions.  Clarifying that “Flexible Connections are suggested locations only and while the City expects that future connections will be made approximately where shown, the definitive final location for any required paths through the middle of private property will be determined during project approval.”
Chapter 9, Utilities
654
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.1  Revision to the figures related to the SAFER BAY flood control project: one to reflect the City’s preferred alignment throughout the Plan Area (an outward alignment of SAFER Bay just north of the end of Bay Road and an inland alignment north of 391 Demeter Street), and the second to correctly illustrate the SFCJPA’s planned 42-foot buffer along the backs of homes in University Village
 Strengthening the shallow groundwater policies (a required vulnerability assessment) to apply beyond just shoreline-adjacent properties to any property containing shallow groundwater (defined as less than six feet from surface)  Clarify that the City will approach the coordination of SAFER BAY construction and project constructions on a case-by-case basis, but the expectation is that if the project is built first, then space shall be left for the future construction of SAFER BAY by a public entity (retaining walls may be necessary).
 Clarification that construction or funding of infrastructure improvements in excess of development impact fees can be considered community benefits, including addressing existing deficiencies or acquiring off-site rights-of-way.  Revised to reflect that LLMDs (Landscaping and Lighting Maintenance District) cannot be used to fund maintenance of private facilities.
 Add a note that the utility system diagrams in the Plan (9-1, 9-2, 9-3) reflect draft alignments of pipes and applicants may submit alternate alignments, subject to Public Works approval.
 Clarify that applicants are expected to underground overhead (not transmission lines) electric lines only on their property or street frontage to the nearest electrical pole.  Update to the description of where BCDC’s jurisdiction applies.  Flexibility for applicants to request a change to 4,000 psi high pressure requirements through discussions/negotiations with the Menlo Park Fire District.  Geotechnical reports must consider future groundwater rise and design any proposed underground parking garages to account for this hazard.

Chapter 10, Community Benefits [**Denotes changes made in response to Council comments received during September 25th study session**]
o Addition of “housing for at-risk youth” and adult care to the Priority Benefits list ** o Addition of housing projects for vulnerable populations as mentioned in the Housing Element (e.g., large family households and extremely low-income households) to the Priority Benefits list.
o Adding language to clarify if an affordable housing project is financed with low-income housing tax credits (LIHTC), then so long as the if project meets the TCAC standards for a project and unit sizes that then comparability requirements will be waived. o Add caveat that draft marketing, outreach and tenant selection plan to maximize local live/work preference to the full extent allowable by State and fair housing law “and any other funding regulations for funds secured to build the project.” 655
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.1
o Clarifying how the Framework applies to phased projects (applicants would be able to take credit for affordable residential or community-serving components already completed as part of a future application for Office/R&D Allocation.) o Clarifying that developer/property owner shall provide residents with relocation assistance and, if qualified, an option to move into the new development (if a residential project) once it is completed.
o Add guidelines preferencing allocations to projects that emphasize the affordable housing category (as a priority benefits option)
o Clarification that the point system and list of priority benefits should be “regularly revisited and recalibrated as needed to reflect changing community values and priorities, economic conditions, and land/development costs.”  Revisions and addition of footnotes to Table 10-3 Exemplary Framework Targets/Expectations, as discussed in July 25th staff report.

Chapter 11, Implementation [**Denotes changes made in response to Council comments received during September 25th study session**]
 Deletion of the Conditional Allocation Process or “Hold” to simplify future allocation and entitlement processes. **
o Council would still have the discretion to re-invoke a “Hold” process in the future if conditions/market demand supported its return.
 Extend the Local Jobs Narrative requirement to the Base Tier.  Addition of timelines for review of Standard/Exemplary Tier proposals and associated Community Benefits Program (maximum of 90 days for City review of applications; if not completed during this timeframe, the applicant’s obligation to pay the Specific Plan Reimbursement Fee at the time of allocation is delayed until issuance of building permit when other impact fees are due).
 The map identifying specific dedications or easements has been removed (formerly Figure 11-3). Specific locations will be negotiated during project approval. o It has been clarified that a transportation/public access easement is required where the public will have access to privately owned streets, sidewalks, and alleyways. However, if there are any public utilities installed in a privately owned street, then a Public Utilities Easement (PUE) shall be provided/recorded by the applicant.
o For public plazas and open spaces, the City (at their discretion) may accept a license agreement in place of a public access easement. This decision is expected to occur during negotiations with the developer/property owner.  Revision to the duration of entitlements that can be obtained through the Office/R&D allocation process by removing the potential for an extension for Base Tier projects (five years maximum). **
o Longer terms may still be negotiated through a D.A. for Standard and Exemplary Tier developments, the “5 year + 5-year extension” is a starting point for negotiations but the City can consider alternative terms. 656
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.1  Addition of a policy to monitor/track the total square footage of industrial development in the Plan Area, but not to outright limit it. This would take the form of an annual report to Council on the amount and type of development allocated and permitted.**  As a backstop for affordable housing development tied to a Standard or Exemplary project that offers a donation of land to a non-profit developer, add a new “Safety Net InLieu Policy,” which requires that in order to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy for a NonResidential project that relies on development of affordable housing as part of its Community Benefits proposal, either the affordable housing project must demonstrate substantial evidence of progress (such as secured financing and a building permit application) or the applicant must pay the Commercial Linkage fee in-lieu of this evidence.**
 Change the Immediate Allocation Window to a “Gatekeeper-like” process that could be triggered at City discretion. This would taek the form of an open allocation window whereby all proposals received during a time period (to be determined by staff or Council) would be reviewed and considered simultaneously for allocation. This Review of Allocation Requests would occur semi-automatically (every two years) or more frequently at staff or Council’s request/initiation. ** Housing Element-Related Changes
Revisions are being made to multiple chapters to implement programs and policies contained in the City’s adopted 2023-2031 Housing Element, including:
 Considering possible fee waivers, reductions, or deferred payment of development impact and permit fees for affordable housing projects to improve project feasibility.  Noting that qualifying affordable residential projects would only require streamlined ministerial review and could be exempt from CEQA review (SB 35).  Prioritizing construction of public utility and infrastructure improvements that are necessary to serve a 100% affordable housing project.
 Add “construction of affordable housing units for vulnerable populations” to the Table of Priority Benefits (Table 10-1).
 Protections for residents displaced as a result of development (required relocation assistance and, if qualified, an option to move into the residential development).

Minor Changes Made to the Specific Plan After November 18, 2024 Additional changes were made to the Draft Specific Plan in response to Planning Commission direction and public comments heard at the November 18 Planning Commission hearing on the Specific Plan. Changes were also made to make the requirements clearer and more consistent across the Specific Plan and with State law. Those changes are included as tracked changes in underlined italicized text in the Final Draft Plan. Changes include the following:
 Clarification that industrial and manufacturing uses are permitted in Waterfront office  Clarification that development regulations in Chapter 18 of the Development Code would apply to residential uses, as well as development standards in the Specific Plan  Note that streamlined and/or ministerial review would be applicable per state law. 657
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.1  Modifications to Table 6-1 in response to Planning Commission direction, clarification to state law and footnote changes to clarify requirement, including allowing family day care homes as a permitted use.
 Clarifications on development standards, such as setbacks, lot coverage, frontage design and parking, as well as accompanying modifications to related Figures.  Clarification of standards for Parks, Open Spaces and Public Facilities (Chapter 7)  Clarification of requirements regarding utilities and impact fees.  Community Benefits Chapter changes to clarify that COPA applies to publicly owned surplus or underutilized land and adding more detail to strategies related to jobs and workforce development.
 Clarification on Implementation, Chapter 11 for a flexible allocation process, timeframe definitions and fair share of infrastructure improvements. .

List of Zoning Map Changes (in Specific Plan and Development Code) Parcel APN(s) Description Proposed Zone
063132170 Rezoning of rear parcel associated with
1923 Bay Road from REC to Bay Road
Central
Bay Road Central
063050050 (portion) A swap of parcels owned by Emerson
Collective/ Sycamore (391 Demeter
Road property from Flex Overlay to
REC)
REC
063121320
063121340
063121200
063121330
063121530
063121540
063121040
A swap of parcels owned by Emerson
Collective/ Sycamore (properties at the
north end of Pulgas Rd from REC to
Waterfront Office)
Waterfront Office
063240490 Rezoning of the City Library parcel from
REC to Public Facility
Public Facility
063121290
063131290 (portion) Rezoning of two parcels along the
southeast side of Demeter Street from
REC to Industrial Transition.

Industrial Transition
063121050
063121150
063121060
063121160
063132060
063121170
063132220
Rezoning of properties along the east
side of Tara Road from Flex Overlay to
Waterfront Office
Waterfront Office
658
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.1
063121030 Rezoning of parcel at the end of Tara
Road from Flex Overlay to REC
REC
063271570
063271550
063271420
063271410
063271540
063271560
Rezoning of residential properties
immediately east of Pulgas Ave (1120 to
1160 Weeks Street) from Industrial
Transition to R-MD-1
R-MD-1
Additionally, residential overlays (for R-MD-1, R-MD-2, or R-HD-5) have been added to several parcels in the Plan Area as confirmed by City Council at a session held on February 1, 20226; however, these overlays do not change the underlying zone. It is intended for the updated Specific Plan to constitute, or serve, as the Development Code for the Specific Plan area.

Related Development Code Amendment
The East Palo Alto Municipal Code (Development Code) includes Chapter 18.18. The purpose of this chapter is to identify all specific plans that have been adopted by the City and to refer to the specific plan itself. Staff are proposing to update the chapter by updating the land use designations to reflect what is in the updated Specific Plan, per Attachment 6. In addition, as discussed above, there are land use designation amendments incorporated in the Specific Plan Update. All other provisions of the Development Code would remain the same.

Planning Commission
On November 18, 2024 a Planning Commission public hearing7 was held and there was discussion around the following topics:
 The mechanics of how the citywide TDM Ordinance will be applied in the Plan Area and that the formation of a Transportation Management Association (TMA) among the developers will be important and helpful in reducing traffic impacts  A reminder that the Loop Road was removed from the Plan, as discussed at the joint City Council and Planning Commission study session on July 25, 2024  Questions around the current value of the Commercial Linkage Fee and how it is calculated and changes from year to year
 Explanation of how Parking Maximums work and the change from a maximum of 2.5 to

3.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet of R&D space
 Question about the needed increase in sanitary sewer treatment capacity (from the PARWQCB plant) and how it will be paid for
 Clarification that staff provided the redlined versions of the Specific Plan so that Planning Commission were not be expected to review all the documents entirely and could focus 6 February 1, 2022 City Council Meeting: https://eastpaloalto.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1487 7 Planning Commission Staff Report: https://d3n9y02raazwpg.cloudfront.net/cityofepa/e09160a4-b714-11eebb82-0050569183fa-7f48fc51-5e50-4fb4-a225-a2e75ac9fb0f-1731980495.pdf or https://www.cityofepa.org/citycouncil/page/agenda-and-minutes 659
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.1
on the summary of changes provided in the redlined attachments but also in the staff report
 Some members of the Planning Commissioners expressed concerns about air quality and traffic that would be generated by development in the Plan Area  Members of the public expressed concern that there was not adequate time to review the revised plans. Sand Hill Partners (a property owner within the Plan Area) requested that the Four Corners site be removed from the RBD Specific Plan, which was also included in their November 18, 2024 letter to the Planning Commission. Other public commenters expressed concerns about groundwater contamination and request for additional workforce related community benefits to be reflected in the RBD policies.

City staff and the consultant team were able to address the Commission questions and comments, and the Commission approved a resolution that this body had considered the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report and recommended that the City Council:

1. Approve the amendments to the General Plan

2. Approve the Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners Specific Plan

3. Approve the amendments to Zoning/Development Code and map Next Steps and Timeline
If approved by City Council, the second reading would occur on the next available Council meeting date: December 17, 2024.

Fiscal Impact
There is no fiscal impact on the City due to the approval of this staff report. Any project that benefits from a future update to the RBD Specific Plan would be required to reimburse the City for all Plan Preparation expenditures on a proportional square foot basis. When the developers submit their payments to reimburse the City for preparation of this Specific Plan Update, it would also include a 10% administrative fee to cover City overhead.

Public Notice
The public was provided notice of this agenda item by posting the City Council agenda on the City’s official bulletin board outside City Hall and making the agenda and report available at the City’s website and at the San Mateo County Library located at 2415 University Avenue, East Palo Alto. Additionally, the public was provided electronic advance notice of the public hearing through notifications sent from the City’s email contact database which contains hundreds of resident and stakeholder emails (on November 22, 2024). A newspaper ad was also published in the San Mateo Daily Journal on November 22, 2024. Additionally, the City has also published a project website, which includes links to the Draft Specific Plan, environmental documents, staff reports and other updates.

The website can be found at the following web address:
660
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.1
 https://www.cityofepa.org/planning/page/rbd-specific-plan-update.

Environmental
A Public Draft SEIR has been prepared as part of the subsequent environmental review process needed to evaluate the proposed changes to the Ravenswood Business District Specific Plan (increased square footage of allowable non-residential development as well as additional housing units) analyzed in the previously certified 2013 Ravenswood Specific Plan FEIR. In accordance with Section 15082 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City previously prepared a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for this SEIR. The NOP was circulated to local, state, and federal agencies on April 15, 2022. The standard 30-day comment period concluded on May 16, 2022. A list of all public comments received on the Draft SEIR can be viewed on the project website.8 The Public Draft SEIR was released on July 26, 2024. The 46-day public comment period opened on the same day and was held open through September 10, 2024.

A Notice of Availability (NOA) has been distributed as required by CEQA, and the document was be posted on the project website. The 46-day public comment period has ended as of September 10th. A Final SEIR has been prepared, consisting of the response to public comments on the draft SEIR and outlining any updates or revisions to the DSEIR. The Final SEIR will be considered by the City Council for certification in compliance with CEQA.

The Final SEIR is available at the following web address:
 https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/16201/rbd_sp ecific_plan_update_final_seir_11.15.24.pdf
A copy of the Draft SEIR is available at the following web address:
 https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/16201/draft_r bd_specific_plan_update_seir_7.24.24_update_web-ready.pdf Associated appendices are available on the RBD Specific Plan Update webpage:
 https://www.cityofepa.org/planning/page/rbd-specific-plan-update CEQA Overview
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 Ravenswood/4 Corners Specific Plan Update.

An overview of the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (FSEIR) process is provided in Table 1 below. The Draft SEIR preparation begins with an initial project review, circulation of a Notice of Preparation (NOP), preparation of a Draft EIR commences. Once completed, State law requires that a Notice of Availability (NOA) be circulated to announce that the Draft EIR is available for review for public comments for a minimum of 45 days. 8 Link to all comments received on the Public Draft Subsequent EIR (SEIR):
https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/16201/dseir_comments_all.pdf 661
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.1
Table 1: FSEIR Process Overview
Activity Purpose Public Participation Opportunity
1 Notice of
Preparation
(NOP)
Communicates to the public, agencies,
and organizations an SEIR is being
prepared. Also, it serves to solicit
input on the scope and content of the
environmental information to be
included in the SEIR.

Public Meeting(s). A scoping
meeting informs the public that the
City is evaluating a project under
CEQA and allows the City to solicit
public comment and identify
possible impacts.
2 Draft SEIR
(DEIR)
The DSEIR is the first iteration of
environmental analyses containing the
project description, identification of
impacts, technical studies, mitigation
measures and alternatives
DSEIR includes publication of NOP
public comments.
3 Notice of
Availability
(NOA)
An NOA provides notice that the
DSEIR is available for public review
and comment for no less than 45 days.

The NOA also identifies where the
DSEIR may be reviewed and how to
submit comments on the DSEIR.

Public Comment. The NOA is
typically circulated to nearby
property owners and occupants,
posted at the site, posted on the
City's project website, and filed
with the State Clearinghouse. The
public may submit comments at any
time during the 45-day public
comment period.

Public Hearing. A public meeting is
held to solicit comments from the
Planning Commission and the public
on the Draft SEIR during the public
comment period.
4 Final SEIR
(FSEIR)
A Final SEIR includes responses to
public comments received after
release of the DSEIR, the DSEIR, and
revisions to the DSEIR, and any
additional relevant project information.

FSEIR includes comments and
responses to DSEIR public
comments.
5 Certification A certification is an official position Public Hearing. The decision-making body certifies the SEIR at a Public
662
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.1
taken by the City Council indicating
that the SEIR has complied with CEQA
for the identified project.

Hearing with a portion of the
meeting is dedicated to public
comment.

The City prepared a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for this SEIR, which was circulated to local, state, and federal agencies on April 15, 2022. The NOP was also published in the Palo Alto Daily News on April 15, 2022. The standard 30-day comment period concluded on May 16, 2022. The NOP provided a general description of the proposed project and identified possible environmental impacts that could result from implementation of the project. The City held a public scoping meeting on May 9, 20229 with the Planning Commission to discuss the project and solicit public input as to the scope and contents of this SEIR.

The scoping period, including the May 9, 2022 Planning Commission meeting, provided an opportunity for the public to inform the City of environmental concerns and were addressed in the SEIR.

Draft SEIR Circulation
The Draft SEIR was published and circulated on July 26, 2024 for public review and comment.

The Notice of Availability (NOA)10 for the Draft SEIR, contains details on the online and physical availability of the Draft SEIR, as well as directions for how to comment in both English and Spanish, was circulated at the start of the public review period on July 26, 2024, through the following avenues:
 Newspaper advertisement on July 26, 2024 in the Daily News  Email to public agencies, interested parties and community organizations  Posting to the City’s website, social media accounts and newsletter The Draft SEIR was available at the City of East Palo Alto Planning Division offices at 1960 Tate Street, East Palo Alto, CA 94303 and at both City Hall and the East Palo Alto Library at 2415 University Avenue, East Palo Alto, CA 94303; and now remains available online at:
 https://www.cityofepa.org/planning/page/rbd-specific-plan-update Government Code § 84308
Applicability of Levine Act: No, as the proposed action does not yet involve an entitlement.

Analysis of Levine Act Compliance: Not applicable.
9 May 9, 2022 Planning Commission Scoping Meeting:
http://eastpaloalto.iqm2.com/Citizens/SplitView.aspx?Mode=Video&MeetingID=1829&Format=Agenda 10 Link to NOA:
https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/16201/rbd_seir_noa_july_2024_english _final.pdf
663
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 9.1
Attachments

1. CEQA Resolution, Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program

2. Links to Final EIR, FEIR Erratas, and Draft EIR

3. Specific Plan Ordinance

4. Link to Final Tracked Changes Specific Plan

5. Development Code Amendment Ordinance

6. General Plan Amendment Resolution

7. Published Notice - City Council Public Hearing
Glossary
RBD. Ravenswood Business District, the primary area within the Plan (in addition to Four Corners).

SPU. Specific Plan Update, or “this project.”
SEIR. Subsequent Environmental Impact Review, the legally required environmental study and analysis of the potential impacts of new development.

DSEIR/FSEIR. Draft and Final SEIR documents.

CEQA. California Environmental Quality Act, the State law requiring EIRs.

FAR. Floor Area Ratio, or a measure of how large/intense a development is.

SFCJPA. San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority, the entity that is leading the SAFER Bay flood control effort.

BCDC. Bay Conservation and Development Commission, a body that reviews and approves developments located adjacent to the Bay.

EPASD. East Palo Alto Sanitary District, the entity which currently provides sanitary sewer services in the City and oversees the sewer infrastructure.

R&D. Research and Development, a broad land use category that encompasses a variety of scientific/technical, medical/pharmaceutical, and laboratory/life science uses.

S.F. Square feet, a common measurement of a development’s total interior building size.

R+A. Raimi + Associates, primary consultant overseeing the Specific Plan Update. 664
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
ATTACHMENT – 1 CEQA Resolution, Findings of Fact, and Statement of Overriding Consideration, Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program

551\01\3873245.1
RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO

CERTIFYING A FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (FSEIR), ADOPTING THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN (MMRP), ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND

DIRECTING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF DETERMINATION FOR THE

RAVENSWOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE
WHEREAS, the City has prepared an update to the Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners Specific Plan (“Specific Plan”) to revise land use policies, related figures and tables, development standards, design guidelines, implementation measures, and other amendments for the purpose of allowing additional development capacity in the Specific Plan area, achieving priority community benefits, and defining necessary public facility and infrastructure improvements; WHEREAS, the City has prepared corresponding amendments to the General Plan and Development Code;
WHEREAS, the Final Environmental Impact Report for the previously adopted Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners Specific Plan was certified in 2013 (SCH #:
2011052006);
WHEREAS, in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15162, a Subsequent EIR (SEIR) was prepared as part of the supplemental environmental review process needed to evaluate the proposed changes to the Specific Plan analyzed in the previously certified 2013 Ravenswood Specific Plan FEIR;
WHEREAS, on April 15, 2022, the City circulated a Notice of Preparation to local, state, and federal agencies with a comment period that concluded on May 16, 2022; WHEREAS, the City held a public scoping meeting on May 9, 2022 to discuss the project and solicit public input as to the scope and contents of the SEIR; WHEREAS, on July 24, 2024 the City issued a Notice of Availability of the Draft SEIR and received twenty-three public comments letters during the forty-six day comment period, which ended on September 10, 2024;
WHEREAS, a Final SEIR and Errata to the Final SEIR has been prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15132 and in accordance with CEQA 665
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
ATTACHMENT – 1 CEQA Resolution, Findings of Fact, and Statement of Overriding Consideration, Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program

551\01\3873245.1
Guidelines 15090 has been presented to the City Council, the City Council has reviewed and considered the Final SEIR, Errata, and the comments received during the public comment period and the SEIR reflects the City’s as lead agency, independent judgment and analysis;
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; WHEREAS, on November 18, 2024, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the Specific Plan Update, General Plan amendment, Zoning Code amendments and the SEIR, and reviewed all evidence and testimony presented and after considering the SEIR, recommended the City Council approve the Specific Plan update and General Plan and Zoning amendments;
WHEREAS, on December 3, 2024, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the Specific Plan, General Plan amendment, and Zoning Code amendment and has reviewed the Final SEIR, staff report, and all evidence and information submitted before or at the public hearing;
WHEREAS, the Final SEIR reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis on the potential for environmental impacts and constitutes the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the Specific Plan;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE EAST PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL that:

1. The City Council hereby finds that the above Recitals are true and correct and by this reference makes them a part hereof;

2. The City Council hereby certifies that the Ravenswood/Four Corners Transit Oriented Development Specific Plan Update Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SCH #: 2022040352) on file with the City Clerk has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines;

3. The Final SEIR was presented to the City Council, and the City Council reviewed and considered all the evidence and information in the Final EIR prior to any action on the Specific Plan;

4. The Final SEIR reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City Council.
666
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
ATTACHMENT – 1 CEQA Resolution, Findings of Fact, and Statement of Overriding Consideration, Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program

551\01\3873245.1

5. The City Council hereby adopts the Findings concerning significant impacts, mitigation measures, and alternatives set forth in Exhibit A;

6. The City Council hereby adopts a Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program, attached hereto as Exhibit B, pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21000 et seq. and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Title 14, Sections 15000 et seq.);

7. The City Council hereby adopts a Statement of Overriding Considerations attached hereto as Exhibit A; and

8. The City Council hereby directs the Community and Economic Development Director to file a Notice of Determination within five business days of adoption pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15075.

ADOPTED on this 3rd day of December 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Signed:
_____________________
Antonio D. Lopez, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________ ______________________
James Colin, City Clerk John D. Lê, City Attorney
667
A–1

EXHIBIT A
City of East Palo Alto
Findings Required Under the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.)
Ravenswood Business District/Four Corners

1. Introduction
A public agency may not approve or carry out a project for which an Environmental Impact Report (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) on November 18, 2024 published a Final Subsequent EIR (SEIR) for the Ravenswood Business District/Four Corners Specific Plan Update (Specific Plan Update).

The Specific Plan Update would increases the total amount of development allowed within the Specific Plan area by increasing the maximum square footages for office, R&D/life science, light industrial, civic/community, and tenant amenity, and the total number of residential units allowed under the Specific Plan Update by allowing for an additional 2,135,100 square feet of office space, 1,167,250 square feet of R&D space, 300,000 square feet of industrial space, 129,700 square feet of civic space, 114,400 square feet of retail space, 53,500 square feet of tenant amenity space, and 1,350 residential units.

In addition, the DRAFT SEIR for the Specific Plan Update includes a multi-use path along the northern and eastern perimeter of the Specific Plan area. Refer to Section 2.0 of the Draft SEIR for a further description of the Specific Plan Update.

The Final SEIR identified significant or potentially significant and unavoidable environmental effects for two resource topics (i.e., operational criteria air pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions) associated with future projects under the Specific Plan Update. The Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations set forth below (Findings) are presented for 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 considerations, which in the City’s judgement, justify approval of Specific Plan Update despite residual environmental effects.

2. Record of Proceedings and Custodian of Record
668
A–2
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 SEIR, associated appendices to the Draft EIR, and technical materials cited in the
Draft EIR.
 Final SEIR, 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. Recirculation is Not Required
In the course of responding to comments received during the public review and comment period on the Draft SEIR, some modifications have been made and some amplifying and clarifying information has been added to the Final SEIR and errata. The City has analyzed the modifications in the Final SEIR and has assessed whether those modifications trigger the threshold for recirculation as identified in Public Resources Code Section 21092.1 and in CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5. The analysis demonstrated that the Project approved by the City Council falls within the scope of the Draft SEIR analysis.

The Project as reviewed in the Final SEIR will not result in any significant environmental impacts not identified in the Draft EIR or result in a substantial increase in the severity of a significant environmental impact identified in the Draft EIR, nor will any modifications to the mitigation measures result in new significant impacts. The City Council hereby determines, based on the standards provided in Public Resources Code Section 21092.1 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 that recirculation of the EIR is not required prior to approval of the Project.

4. Severability
669
A–3
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.

5. Findings for Significant Impacts that Can Be Avoided or Reduced to a Less Than Significant Level with Implementation of Mitigation Measures Impact AIR-1: Future projects under the Specific Plan Update could result in construction criteria pollutant emissions above BAAQMD thresholds resulting in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant regional air quality impact.

Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM AIR-1.1 requires future projects to complete construction criteria pollutant and toxic air contaminant (TAC) quantification and modeling once the construction equipment and phasing details are available to identify impacts and, if necessary include measures to reduce emissions to below the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) thresholds. Examples of these measures include the use of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Tier 4 emission standards for all construction equipment larger than 25 horsepower used at the future development sites for more than two continuous days or 20 hours. In addition, if use of Tier 4 equipment is not available, alternatively use of equipment that meets U.S. EPA emission standards for Tier 2 or 3 engines and includes particulate matter emissions control equivalent to CARB Level 3 verifiable diesel emission control devices that altogether achieve an 85-percent reduction in particulate matter exhaust in comparison to uncontrolled equipment. MM AIR-1.1 also requires future projects to limit the idling time of construction on-road and off-road equipment and the use of low volatile organic compound (VOC) (i.e., ROG emitting) building coatings, that are below current BAAQMD requirements. The measures are recognized as effective by BAAQMD and would be included on construction documents and enforceable. as conditions of approval and through response to nuisance complaints to a designated compliance monitor. This potentially significant impact related to construction criteria pollutant emissions would be effectively mitigated below applicable thresholds of significance established in the SEIR.

Impact AIR-3: Fugitive dust emissions from future projects’ construction diesel exhaust and equipment could result in significant health risk impacts to nearby sensitive receptors.

MM AIR-3.2 requires future projects that would have construction emissions that exceed BAAQMD thresholds to implement enhanced BMPs such as limiting the simultaneous occurrence of excavation, grading, and ground-disturbing construction activities, installing wind breaks (e.g., trees, fences) on the windward side(s) of actively disturbed areas of construction, and hydroseeding or applying non-toxic soil stabilizers to construction areas, including previously graded areas, that are inactive for at least 10 calendar days. The implementation of the above measures reduces the impact from fugitive dust emissions to a less than significant level by lowering the levels of exhaust and dust emissions. The measures are recognized as effective by the BAAQMD and would be included on construction documents and enforceable.

Impact AIR-4: The construction exhaust emissions from future projects could exceed BAAQMD thresholds and may result in community health risks for sensitive receptors such as nearby residents.

Finding: Future projects under the Specific Plan Update are required to implement mitigation measures, and Specific Plan Update policies and standards to reduce impacts to a less than significant level as identified in the Final SEIR.

Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM AIR-4.1 requires future applicants proposing development of projects within 1,000 feet of existing sensitive receptors (as defined by BAAMQD) to prepare a site-specific construction health risk assessment (HRA). If the HRA demonstrates that health risks would exceed BAAQMD projectlevel thresholds, additional feasible on- and off-site mitigation shall be identified to further reduce risks to the greatest extent practicable. Depending on the results of the HRA, measures to reduce construction health risk impacts could include the use of Tier 4 engines for all off-road equipment greater than 50 horsepower and operating for more than 20 total hours over the entire duration of construction activities, use renewable diesel during construction, and use of portable electrical equipment where commercially available and practicable to complete construction. The specific measures included in MM AIR-4.1 are recommended by BAAQMD and would reduce construction toxic air contaminant (TAC) emissions below applicable thresholds of significance established in the SEIR. By reducing construction TAC emissions, this potentially significant impact to sensitive receptors would be effectively mitigated. 671
A–5
Impact BIO-1: Disturbance or destruction of individual special-status plant species such as the Congdon’s tarplant, alkali milk vetch, and Point Reyes bird’s beak could occur during construction activities associated with future development projects, resulting in a significant impact to these species.

Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM BIO-1.1 requires that prior to initial ground disturbance, for future projects in salt marsh, tidal slough, and grassland/ruderal habitats, a qualified plant ecologist shall complete an appropriately timed survey for Congdon's tarplant, Alkali milk vetch, and Point Reyes bird's beak within the project footprint, and (as access and visibility allow) a 50-foot buffer around the project footprint. The mitigation requires that MM BIO-1.2 and MM BIO-1.3 (described below) be implemented if special-status plants are found in the impact area or identified buffers.

Mitigation Measure MM BIO-1.2 requires to the extent feasible, and in consultation with a qualified plant ecologist, that future project proponents submit a design for the future project to the City, to completely avoid impacts on all populations of specialstatus plants within the project footprints or within the identified buffers of the impact areas. The mitigation also requires that prior to initial ground disturbance or vegetation removal, the limits of the identified buffer around special-status plants to be avoided shall be marked in the field. The measure also requires that MM BIO-1.3 be implemented if complete avoidance is not feasible and more than 10 percent of a special status plant population would be impacted as determined by a qualified plant ecologist.

Based on Mitigation Measure MM BIO-1.3 requirements, if future projects’ avoidance of special-status plants is not feasible and more than 10 percent of the population would be impacted, compensatory mitigation will be provided via the preservation, enhancement, and management of occupied habitat for the species, or the creation and management of a new population. The mitigation also requires future projects to prepare a habitat mitigation and monitoring plan (HMMP) developed by a qualified biologist or restoration ecologist, which would be implemented for mitigation lands.

The above mitigation is enforceable by the City, and would be effective in reducing future projects’ impacts to special-status plants to a less than significant level.

Impact BIO-2: Future projects’ construction activities could result in a significant impact to the salt marsh harvest mouse and salt marsh wandering shrew populations and their habitat.

Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM BIO-2.1 requires future development projects, including the multi-use path, within 100 feet of an area identified as salt 672
A–6
marsh, open water, or tidal slough to have a habitat assessment prepared by a qualified biologist. For all habitats identified by the biologist as suitable habitat for the salt marsh harvest mouse or salt marsh wandering shrew, the mitigation requires that this habitat be avoided for development and preserved in their existing state, to the extent feasible. The mitigation includes measures to be implemented by future projects if avoidance of salt marsh habitats is infeasible. These measures include a requirement that vegetation removal will be limited to the minimum amount necessary to permit the activity to occur to avoid the loss of individual harvest mice or shrews from any excavation, fill, or construction activities in suitable habitat, ceasing all work that could impact the harvest mouse or wandering shrew individual until the animal has moved out of the impact area on its own, and planting dense upland ecotone/transitional salt marsh vegetation along the immediate edge of the shoulder of the multi-use path adjacent to salt marsh and upland grassland habitats to provide high-tide refugia for both species.

MM BIO-2.2 requires future projects, including the multi-use path, to compensate for their impacts on the salt marsh harvest mouse and salt marsh wandering shrew habitat via the purchase of credits from a conservation bank or mitigation bank that has restored suitable salt marsh habitat for these species; project-specific mitigation via the preservation and management of suitable habitat for this species; or some combination of the two approaches. The mitigation requires compensatory mitigation for any potentially suitable habitat for the harvest mouse and wandering shrew species that is permanently lost to development or that is present within 50 feet of any new or higher-intensity lighting installed by Specific Plan Update activities. The mitigation requires future project applicants to contract with a qualified plant or restoration ecologist to prepare an HMMP describing the measures that will be taken to create, restore, or enhance habitat for the salt marsh harvest mouse and salt marsh wandering shrew and monitor the effects of the mitigation on these species.

To reduce impacts to salt marsh habitats, Mitigation Measures MM BIO-2.3 prohibits the use of rodenticides within 100 feet of salt marsh habitat and MM BIO-2.4 requires restrictions for the use of pesticides within 100 feet of salt marsh habitat. Restrictions related to pesticide use within 100 feet of salt marsh habitat include requiring all pesticides used to be in accordance with the manufacturer’s directions and that no pesticides shall be applied within tidal marsh habitats. To reduce impacts to harvest mice and wandering shrew, MM BIO-2.5 requires future projects to place raptor perch deterrents on any edges of the building or structures within 300 feet of salt marsh habitats.

MM BIO-2.6 includes measures for future projects to avoid perches for avian predators and dense woody vegetation that could hide mammalian predators of salt marsh harvest mouse and salt marsh wandering shrew. The mitigation requires future projects’ new landscaping, as well as the size, location and species of any new or replacement public street trees, within 300 feet of salt marsh habitats to be reviewed by a qualified biologist familiar with these species’ ecology prior to City approval. In addition, MM BIO-2.7 requires future developments to prohibit outdoor cat feeding 673
A–7
stations within 300 feet of salt marsh habitats and off-leash dogs within 100 feet of salt marsh habitats to reduce impacts to the harvest mouse and wandering shrew individuals. To reduce impacts on salt marsh harvest mice and salt marsh wandering shrews due to the attraction of nuisance predators, MM NOI-2.8 includes measures that require future developments within 100 feet of salt marsh habitats to manage food wastes by requiring lids that seal tightly on bins, requiring future owners to place signs on trash and recycling receptables with reminders to close lids, and prohibiting residents and visitors from feeding feral or wild animals.

The above measures are enforceable and would reduce future projects’ impacts to salt marsh harvest mouse and wandering shrew individuals and habitat to a less than significant level.

Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM BIO-3.1 requires future development projects to avoid causing the abandonment of an active California Ridgway’s rail or California black rail nest. The mitigation requires future project activities within 700 feet of salt marsh habitats within or adjacent to the Specific Plan area to be avoided during the rail breeding season (from February 1 through August 31) unless 1) a qualified biologist determines that a reduced buffer (no less than 200 feet) is appropriate due to intervening development or obstructions, the level of disturbance by the activity (in terms of noise and equipment), or other factors that would reduce the potential for the activity to disturb nesting rails, or 2) protocol-level surveys are conducted by a qualified biologist to determine rail locations and territories during the year in which construction is initiated. The mitigation also requires that future project construction activities not occur within 700 feet of an identified California Ridgway’s rail calling center or within 300 feet of a California black rail calling center during the breeding season, if breeding rails are determined to be present. The above measures are enforceable, as determined by the City and qualified biologist, and would reduce the impacts to salt marsh harvest mouse and wandering shrew individuals and habitat to a less than significant level.

Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Specific Plan Update which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final SEIR.
674
A–8
Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measures MM BIO-4.1 and MM BIO-4.2 require future projects to implement measures to reduce impacts to special-status species fish. The mitigation requires personnel working on future projects within or adjacent to salt marsh, open water, or tidal slough habitats to be trained by a qualified biologist in the importance of the marine environment to special-status fish and other aquatic animals and plants, and that the environmental protection measures be put in place to prevent impacts to these species, their habitats, and essential fish habitat (EFH).

MM BIO-4.2 requires future project applicants to implement construction BMPs to protect water quality including the measures to monitor sediment such as only allowing stockpiling to occur in approved construction areas, monitor construction debris and litter, and only allow the fueling washing, and maintenance of vehicles in developed habitats. The above measures are enforceable, as determined by the City and qualified biologist, and would reduce the impacts to special-status fish species to a less than significant level.

Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM BIO-5.1 requires future projects to reduce impacts to burrowing owls by implementing pre-construction surveys for burrowing owls for construction activities within 250 feet of their nesting habitat and buffer zones (165 feet from their habitat during nonbreeding season and 250 feet from their nesting area if owls are present during breeding season). The mitigation prohibits future projects from relocating burrowing owls during breeding season. If, during the nonbreeding season, it is infeasible to maintain a buffer around occupied burrow(s) large enough to ensure that the burrow(s) will not be physically disturbed (thus risking injury or mortality of the owl), the mitigation allows future projects to passively relocate the owl from the occupied burrow(s) using one-way doors. The above measure is enforceable, as determined by the City and qualified biologist, and would reduce the impacts to burrowing owls to a less than significant level.

Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM BIO-6.1 requires future projects to reduce impacts to the western snowy plover by requiring a qualified biologist to 675
A–9
conduct a survey for suitable habitat for nesting snowy plovers and for active nests and prohibiting future projects from conducting construction activities within 600 feet of an active snowy plover nest during the snowy plover breeding season and by implementing seasonal and avoidance buffers prior to the initiation of future project construction activities. The above measure is enforceable, as determined by the City and qualified biologist, and would reduce impacts to the western snowy plover to a less than significant level.

Impact BIO-7: Construction disturbance during the bird nesting season (typically February 1 through August 31) could result in the incidental loss of eggs or nestlings of native birds, either directly through the destruction or disturbance of active nests or indirectly by causing enough disturbance to result adult birds abandoning their nests.

Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM BIO-7.1 requires future projects to reduce impacts to native birds by requiring construction activities to be scheduled to avoid nesting season. If it is not possible to schedule construction activities outside of the nesting season, the mitigation requires future projects to complete preconstruction surveys for nesting birds by a qualified biologist no more than seven days prior to the initiation of construction activities or tree removal. If an active nest is found within areas that would be disturbed by future project activities, the mitigation requires that a qualified biologist determine the extent of a construction buffer zone around the nest.

The above measures are enforceable and are in accordance with Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and measures to protect nesting birds, as determined by the City and qualified biologist, would reduce impacts to native birds to a less than significant level.

Impact BIO-8: Increased lighting from future development adjacent to sensitive habitats could result in a significant impact on wildlife such as indirectly increasing predation and bird collisions.

Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM BIO-8.1 requires future projects to reduce impacts related to bird collisions by requiring future projects to minimize exterior lighting in accordance with recommendations from the International Dark Sky Association and reducing light spillage. Mitigation Measure MM BIO-8.2 requires future projects to minimize lighting spillage from building interiors by using mechanisms such as occupancy sensors, dimmers, and blinds from midnight until dawn, at a minimum, during migration seasons. The above measures are enforceable and are in accordance with current lighting standards, as determined by the City and qualified biologist, and would reduce impacts related to bird collisions to a less than significant level.
676
A–10
Impact BIO-9: Construction and operation of future development would result in soil disturbance adjacent to sensitive salt marsh and tidal slough habitats which could result in the spread of non-native plant species in wetland areas in and adjacent to the Specific Plan area.

Finding: C Future projects under the Specific Plan Update are required to implement mitigation measures and/or Specific Plan Update policies and standards to reduce impacts to a less than significant level, as identified in the Final SEIR Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM BIO-9.1 requires future projects to reduce impacts to sensitive habitats by implementing Invasive Weed Best Management Practices such as prohibiting the use of moderate or highly invasive and/or noxious weeds, require all seeds and straw materials used to be certified weed-free rice (or similar material acceptable to the City) during construction, and prohibiting the use of landscaping blowers within 100 feet of the edge of salt marsh post-construction. The above measure is enforceable and are in accordance with current standards, as determined by the City and qualified biologist, and would reduce impacts related to sensitive habitats to a less than significant level.

Impact BIO-10: Future projects adjacent to the salt marsh habitat could result in a significant impact to jurisdictional waters of the state or U.S. habitat.

Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM BIO-10.1 requires future projects to reduce impacts to jurisdictional waters of the state or U.S. habitat (i.e., wetlands) by completing a wetland delineation of the project area to determine the boundaries of the wetlands, identifying the locations of habitats to be avoided in the contract documents and plans, only allowing trenches to be worked from one side to minimize impacts on adjacent habitat, and restoring temporarily impacted wetlands and other waters in place based on a restoration plan prepared by a qualified biologist and approved by the City, as well as the Regional Water Quality Control Board and/or Army Corps of Engineers, as applicable. If impacts to jurisdictional wetlands or other waters cannot be avoided, the implementation of Mitigation Measure MM BIO-10.2 will be required. MM BIO-10.2 requires future projects to provide compensatory mitigation via the purchase of credits from a from a wetland mitigation bank; projectspecific mitigation via the creation or restoration of the same general type of wetlands/waters impacted; or some combination of the two approaches. The mitigation requires compensatory mitigation to be provided at a minimum ratio of 2:1 (mitigation: impact) on an acreage basis if project-specific mitigation is performed or 1:1 if credits are purchased from a mitigation bank. In addition, MM BIO-10.2 requires that a qualified biologist prepare a habitat mitigation and monitoring plan that would include measures to create, restore, or enhance appropriate habitats and to monitor mitigation success. The above measures are enforceable and are in accordance with current standards, as determined by the City and qualified biologist, and would reduce impacts to wetland (i.e., jurisdictional waters of the state or U.S.) habitats to a less than significant level.
677
A–11
Impact BIO-11: Construction of multi-use trail would impede wildlife movement along the upland/tidal marsh interface on the eastern edge of the Specific Plan area.

Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM BIO-2.1 described above requires dense upland ecotone/transitional salt marsh vegetation to be planted along the immediate edge of the shoulder of the multi-use path adjacent to salt marsh and upland grassland habitats to provide high-tide refugia for salt marsh harvest mouse and wandering shrew species for the future multi-use path that would be immediately adjacent to salt marsh and upland grassland habitats. The future multi-use path would also be subject to Mitigation Measure MM BIO-8.1 exterior lighting standards described above which would reduce the impacts of exterior lighting (which some potential to attract and/or disorient birds). In addition, the FSEIR includes Specific Plan Update Bird Safe 6.8.4, which includes requirements related to bird-safe glazing treatments to reduce bird collisions to future buildings along the eastern margin of the Specific Plan area. The above measures are enforceable and are in accordance with current standards, as determined by the City and qualified biologist, and would reduce the Specific Plan Update’s impacts to wildlife movement to a less than significant level.

Impact CUL-1: Future projects could indirectly or directly impact known and unknown historic buildings and structures by removing historic buildings and structures, or altering the setting for historic properties.

Finding: Future projects under the Specific Plan Update are required to implement mitigation measures and/or Specific Plan Update policies and standards to reduce impacts to a less than significant level, as identified in the Final SEIR Rationale/Evidence: Specific Plan Update Policies LU-7.1 and LU-7.2 requires future projects to reduce impacts to historic resources by complying with City, state, and federal historic preservation regulations and contracting an Architectural Historian to prepare a project-specific Historic Architectural Resources Assessment (HARA) for buildings or structures over 45 years of age that could be affected by the future projects. The HARA will provide background context, identify any architectural resources including standing buildings and structures, and provide an evaluation using the criteria of the California Register of Historic Resources. The above measures are enforceable and are in accordance with current standards to protect historic resources, as determined by the City and cultural resources consultant, and would reduce impacts to historic resources to a less than significant level.

Impact CUL-2: Future projects could discover unknown archaeological resources during construction. If Specific Plan Update Policies to protect these resources during construction are not implemented, future projects would have a significant impact on these resources.
678
A–12
Finding: Future projects under the Specific Plan Update are required to implement mitigation measures and/or Specific Plan Update policies and standards to reduce impacts to a less than significant level, as identified in the Final SEIR Rationale/Evidence: Specific Plan Update Policies LU-7.3 through 7.10 require future projects to reduce impacts to archaeological resources. Policy LU-7.3 requires future project applicants to contract with a qualified archaeologist to complete a sitespecific review and evaluation of a development site within the Specific Plan area as part of the discretionary permitting process in regard to archaeological resources. The mitigation requires the identification, review, and evaluation to be completed by qualified professional archaeologists and the results to be presented in a Cultural Resources Assessment Report (CRAR) or similar document format that provides the results of the identification and evaluation effort with site specific mitigation recommendations. Policy LU-7.4 includes measures that could be required by future projects based on the results of the CRAR including the completion of an archaeological testing program, implementation of cultural resources monitoring during construction and recordation of significant building environment resources.

Policy LU-7.5 require future project applicants to contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to complete a Sacred Land Files search and Policy LU7.6 requires future project applicants to note on any plans that require ground disturbing excavation if there is a potential for exposing buried cultural resources and tribal cultural resources including prehistoric Native American burials.

Policy LU-7.7 requires future project applicants to retain a Professional Archaeologist (PA) on an “on-call” basis during ground disturbing construction to review, identify, and evaluate cultural resources that may be inadvertently exposed during construction. Prior to ground disturbing activities, Policy LU-7.8 requires that a PA complete an in-person Worker Awareness Training for cultural resources. If the PA determines that any cultural resources exposed during construction constitute a historical resource and/or unique archaeological resource or tribal cultural resource under CEQA, Policy LU-7.9 requires the PA to notify the project proponent and Community and Economic Development Director, or their designee, of the evaluation and to recommend mitigation measures to reduce the impact to the resource to a less than significant level in accordance with California Public Resources Code Section 15064.5. Policy LU-7.10 requires the submission of a Monitoring Closure Report to the City at the conclusion of ground disturbing construction if archeological and Native American monitoring was undertaken.

The above measures are enforceable and are in accordance with current standards to protect archaeological resources, as determined by the City and cultural resources consultant, and would reduce impacts to archaeological resources to a less than significant level.

Impact CUL-3: Future projects could discover unknown human remains during construction. If Specific Plan Update Policies to protect these resources during 679
A–13
construction are not implemented, future projects would have a significant impact on these resources.

The above measures are enforceable and are in accordance with current City and NAHC standards to protect human remains and implementation of the measures would reduce impacts to human remains to a less than significant level.

Impact GEO-1: Future projects under the Specific Plan Update could directly or indirectly cause substantial adverse effects related to strong seismic ground shaking and seismic-related ground failure.

Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM GEO-1 includes measures for future projects to avoid substantial adverse effects related to strong seismic ground shaking and ground failure. The mitigation requires all structures to be designed using sound engineering judgment and the latest California Building Code (CBC) requirements as a minimum. The mitigation also requires all structures to be designed to resist minor earthquakes without damage, resist moderate earthquakes without structural damage, and resist major earthquakes without collapse. The above measures are enforceable and are in accordance with current City and CBC standards to reduce seismic related adverse effects and implementation of the measures would prevent future projects from exacerbating the effects of seismic shaking and seismic related ground failure on adjacent properties.

Impact GEO-2: Future projects under the Specific Plan Update could directly or indirectly cause substantial adverse effects related to liquefaction.

Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM GEO-2 includes measures for future projects to reduce impacts related to liquefaction by requiring future projects’ building foundations to be designed to compensate for effects of liquefaction, differential 680
A–14
settlement, and lateral spreading due to earthquakes. The mitigation also requires future projects’ foundations to be designed by a qualified structural engineer using soil design parameters developed by qualified geotechnical consultants and verified by the City’s Building Services Division. In addition, future projects would be required to comply with Specific Plan Update Standard 9.7.6 which requires future properties with shallow groundwater levels of less than six feet to complete a geotechnical assessment and submit a list of project measures to the City that will monitor liquefaction. The above measures are enforceable and are in accordance with current City and geotechnical standards that reduce liquefaction-related hazards and implementation of the measures would prevent future projects from exacerbating the effects of seismic-related liquefaction hazards.

Impact GEO-3: Future development adjacent to the San Francisco Bay could result in a significant impact related to lateral spreading.

Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM GEO-3 includes measures for future projects to reduce impacts related to lateral spreading by requiring site development plans and foundations to be designed to compensate for effects of lateral spreading due to earthquakes. The mitigation requires future projects’ earthwork activities, including remedial grading, to be performed using the recommendations provided by qualified geotechnical consultants, and foundations to be designed by a qualified structural engineers using soil design parameters developed by qualified geotechnical consultants and verified by the City’s Building Services Division. The above measures are enforceable and are in accordance with current City and CBC standards that reduce lateral spreading hazards and implementation would prevent future projects from exacerbating the effects of seismic-related lateral spreading hazards.

Impact GEO-4: Future development on existing Bay Mud deposits and fills could result in significant vertical movement and differential settlement.

Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM GEO-4 includes measures for future projects to reduce impacts related to differential settlement by requiring future improvements/development on areas of soft Bay Mud and artificial fill to be designed under the guidance of suitably qualified geotechnical consultants to ensure that the underlying substrate is capable of withstanding the load. The above measure is enforceable and is in accordance with current City and CBC standards that reduce differential settlement hazards and implementation of the measure would prevent future projects from exacerbating the effects of seismic-related differential settlement hazards.
681
A–15
Impact GEO-5: Future development on the existing expansive soils could result in resulting in heaving and cracking of building foundations.

Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM GEO-5 includes measures for future projects to reduce impacts related to expansive soils by requiring future projects’ earthwork and foundations to be designed to compensate for effects of expansive soils. The mitigation requires fill placement and foundation design criteria to be developed by qualified geotechnical consultants and verified by the City’s Building Services Division. The above measures are enforceable and are in accordance with current City and CBC standards that reduce expansive soil hazards and implementation of the measure would prevent future projects from exacerbating the effects of seismic-related expansive soils.

Impact GEO-6: Future projects could encounter paleontological resources during construction, resulting in the destruction of these resources.

Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM GEO-6.1 includes measures to reduce future projects’ impacts on paleontological resources by requiring that all construction activities within 50 feet shall stop and the City to be notified if paleontological resources are encountered during grading or excavation. This measure would be effective because it specifies techniques to protect and/or preserve any such resource. This mitigation also requires a qualified paleontologist to inspect the findings within 24 hours of discovery. 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.

The above measures are enforceable and are in accordance with current City and Public Resources Code standards that reduce impacts to paleontological resources and implementation of the measure would reduce future projects’ impacts to these resources to less than significant.

Impact HAZ-1: Future developments projects 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: Future projects under the Specific Plan Update are required to implement mitigation measures and/or Specific Plan Update policies and standards to reduce impacts to a less than significant level, as identified in the Final SEIR. 682
A–16
Rationale/Evidence: Specific Plan Update Policies LU-5.1 through 5.10 includes measures to reduce future projects’ impacts involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. LU-5.1 requires future projects to complete a propertyspecific Phase I ESA in accordance with ASTM Standard Designation E 1527-21 (or most recent version) to identify Recognized Environmental Conditions, evaluate the property history, and establish if the property is likely to have been impacted by chemical releases, prior to the development redevelopment of site parcels. The mitigation requires property-specific Phase I ESAs to evaluate if remedial measures are needed to protect the health and safety of site occupants and construction workers.

Policy LU-5.2 requires an appropriate corrective action/risk management plan [e.g., Removal Action Workplan or Site Management Plan (SMP)] to be prepared that reflects the results of the on-site investigations prior to the start of earthwork activities on properties with known contaminants of concern (COC) exceeding the lower of the current California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) or U.S. EPA residential screening levels. Policy LU-5.3 requires future projects to prepare a Health and Safety Plan (HSP) to establish health and safety protocols for personnel working at future project sites. Following completion of the HSP, Policy LU-5.3 requires future projects to prepare a report documenting compliance with the provisions of the corrective action/risk management plan and describing the work completed shall be submitted to and approved by the overseeing regulatory agency. To reduce future projects’ impacts related to groundwater contamination, Policy LU-5.4 requires groundwater monitoring wells on-site be protected during construction and that future projects that propose to destroy or relocate on-site wells obtain written approval from the San Mateo County Department of Environmental Health (DEH) Policy LU-5.5 requires the source and quality of any imported soil shall be documented and reported to the appropriate overseeing regulatory agency prior to the start of earthwork activities. Policy LU-5.6 requires that future projects’ facility closure activities (such as removal of remaining hazardous materials, cleaning of hazardous material handling equipment, decontamination of building surfaces, and waste disposal practices) to be coordinated with the DEH to ensure that required closure activities are completed prior to redevelopment of site parcels or change in use.

The above measures would be effective to mitigate risk of soil and groundwater related hazards since they require review by the City and appropriate regulatory oversight agency prior to implementation, and consistency with state and local requirements.

Policies LU-5.7 through LU-5.9 require future projects to implement asbestos and lead-based paint surveys in accordance with National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), BAAQMD standards, and requirements set forth in the CCR Title 8, Section 1532.1 prior to the issuance of a demolition permit. Policy LU-5.10 requires future projects’ demolition contractor to coordinate with DEH prior to 683
A–17
the disposal of any demolition waste (including PBC ballasts, lead acid batteries, and mercury thermostats), to determine if the waste is hazardous and ensure proper disposal of waste materials.

These measures would be effective to mitigate risk of hazards related to the release of hazardous materials during demolition since they require review by the City prior to implementation, and consistency with federal, state, and local requirements. The above measures would be included on final plans and implemented during construction.

Impact NOI-1: Future projects within 500 feet of residential land uses and 200 feet of commercial land uses could result in significant temporary noise impacts to these receptors.

Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM NOI-1.1 includes measures for future projects to reduce construction noise by implementing a construction noise logistics plan prior to the issuance of a grading permit. The construction noise logistics plan would include, but not be limited to, compliance with the City’s construction hours, limiting combined construction noise levels (levels from all construction equipment used per phase), locating staging areas and construction material areas as far away as possible from adjacent land uses, prohibiting all unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines, and designating a “disturbance coordinator” who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise.

Construction noise can be effectively addressed through construction timing, equipment maintenance, and placement of equipment. The above mitigation measures are enforceable, as determined by the City and the City’s noise consultant, and would be included in future projects’ construction documents.

Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM NOI-2.1 includes measures for future projects to reduce the impact related to traffic noise from Specific Plan Update buildout, at the affected Bay Road segments from University Avenue to Clark Avenue and from Clarke Avenue to Pulgas Avenue. The mitigation requires future projects to pay a fair share contribution toward the City’s installation of quieter pavement types, at Bay Road segments from University Avenue to Clark Avenue and Clark Avenue to 684
A–18
Pulgas Avenue, such as Open-Grade Rubberized Asphaltic Concrete or a New Rubberized Asphalt Concrete which would reduce noise levels by five (5) A-weight decibels (dBA ) or more from future conditions (based on the affected segments being repaved every 10 years). The above mitigation would reduce Specific Plan Update buildout traffic noise levels to below the noise levels resulting from cumulative no project traffic volumes and below existing noise levels; the feasibility and effectiveness of the above mitigation was verified by a noise survey and pavement analysis completed by the City’s noise consultant. The mitigation is enforceable and the City will ensure the affected segments are repaved every 10 years via the City’s Capital Improvement Program funding. The above measure would reduce impacts related to Specific Plan Update traffic noise to a less than significant level.

Impact NOI-3: Future development’s operational mechanical equipment could result in noise levels that exceed exterior noise levels at noise-sensitive receptors identified in Section 8.52.030 in the City’s Municipal Code.

Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM NOI-3.1 includes measures for future projects to reduce impacts from operational mechanical equipment. The mitigation requires future projects to retain a qualified acoustical consultant to review mechanical equipment systems during final design of the future project, consistent with standard City practice. The measure also requires the qualified acoustical consultant to review selected equipment and determine specific noise reduction measures necessary to reduce noise to comply with the City’s noise level requirements set forth in Section 8.52.320 of the City’s Municipal Code. Noise reduction measures could include, but are not limited to, selection of equipment that emits low noise levels and/or installation of noise barriers, such as enclosures and parapet walls, to block the line-of-sight between the noise source and the nearest receptors. The above mitigation is consistent with standard practices and the City’s Municipal Code requirements to reduce the impacts of operational mechanical equipment system noise at nearby sensitive receptors. The above mitigation is enforceable, as determined by the City and the City’s noise consultant.

Implementation of the above measures would reduce operational mechanical equipment noise impacts to sensitive receptors to a less than significant level.

Impact NOI-4: Future construction activities could result in groundborne vibration levels exceeding 0.3 in/sec PPV limit at nonhistorical buildings, which would result in a significant vibration impact.

Finding: Future projects under the Specific Plan Update are required to implement mitigation measures and/or Specific Plan Update policies and standards to reduce impacts to a less than significant level, as identified in the Final SEIR. 685
A–19
Rationale/Evidence: Mitigation Measure MM NOI-4.1 includes measures for future projects to reduce impacts from construction-related vibration. The mitigation requires future projects to implement vibration controls during construction including compliance with the construction hours outlined in the City’s Municipal Code, prohibiting the use of heavy vibration generating construction equipment within 25 feet of residences, and using alternative methods for breaking up existing pavement (e.g., use of a pavement grinder, instead of dropping heavy objects within 25 feet of residences adjoining the project site). For future projects requiring impact or vibratory pile driving, the mitigation requires a Construction Vibration Monitoring, Treatment, and Reporting Plan (Reporting Plan) to be implemented to document conditions prior to, during, and after vibration-generating construction activities. All plan tasks shall be undertaken under the direction of a licensed Professional Structural Engineer in the State of California and be in accordance with industry-accepted standard methods.

The mitigation requires future projects’ Reporting Plan tasks to be undertaken under the direction of a licensed Professional Structural Engineer in the State of California and be in accordance with industry-accepted standard methods.

Construction vibration can be effectively addressed by implementing the above measures. The measures are consistent with standard practices and the City’s standards to reduce construction-related vibration. The mitigation measures are enforceable, as determined by the City and the City’s noise consultant, and would be included in future projects’ construction documents. Future projects’ implementation of MM NOI-4.1 would reduce the construction-related vibration impact to a less than significant level.

4. Findings for Significant Impacts that Cannot Be Avoided or Reduced to a Less Than Significant Level (Significant and Unavoidable Effects) Checklist Question a): Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (Plan Level) Impact: The Specific Plan Update would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan Finding: Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations make additional mitigation measures/policies or alternatives infeasible Rationale/Evidence: The SEIR concluded the Specific Plan Update would support the primary goals of the 2017 BAAQMD Climate Action Plan (CAP) because it promotes a mix of uses that include employment and services near new higher density housing. The Specific Plan Update would add housing to the area that is currently predominantly commercial uses. Nonetheless, because the Specific Plan Update would exceed 2017 CAP projections by causing the rate of growth in VMT to exceed the rate of growth in population and jobs, impacts from the implementation of the Specific Plan Update would be significant and unavoidable. 686
A–20
Given the magnitude of the Specific Plan Update there are no other feasible policies that would reduce the significant and unavoidable impact to less than significant. The SEIR includes a No Project/Adopted 2013 Specific Plan Alternative and a Reduced Scale Alternative. Draft SEIR Table 3.3-3 shows the rate of growth for VMT would be higher than the service population growth for the Adopted 2013 Specific Plan. The Reduced Scale Alternative assumes the Specific Plan Update Scenario 2 (i.e. approved project) is reduced in size by 40 percent. If the Scenario 2 daily total VMT and service population is reduced by 40 percent, the Reduced Scale Alternative’s total VMT growth would be 28 percent and the service population growth would be 27 percent, which would result in a significant impact given total VMT would grow at a faster rate than population growth. Please see the Statement of Overriding Considerations below.

Checklist Question a). Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (Project Level) Impact AIR-2 : At buildout, Specific Plan Update operational criteria emissions would exceed the BAAQMD project-level significance thresholds, for both average daily and total annual emissions, for ROG, NOx, and PM10 emissions, resulting in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant regional air quality impact.

Finding: Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations make additional mitigation measures/policies or alternatives infeasible.

Rationale/Evidence: To reduce the impacts related to vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and associated vehicle emissions, the Specific Plan Update Section 8.4.1 Standard 1 includes a 40 percent reduction in daily trips (based in the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ Trip Generation Manual) for future developments through the implementation of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures. In accordance with the City’s TDM Ordinance, the 40 percent trip reduction was accounted for in the SEIR’s operational criteria pollutant emissions analyses. In addition, Specific Plan Update Section 8.4.3, Standard 1 includes a TDM element that includes an option for future projects to participate in a shuttle program (funded by the Transportation Management Agency) to achieve the 40 percent trip reduction requirement. The standard includes flexibility for future projects to implement other TDM elements to achieve the 40 percent trip reduction. For future projects’ operational emergency generators, the Specific Plan Update Policy LU-4.9 requires all diesel stand by emergency generators to meet U.S. EPA Tier 4 engine standards and future projects to obtain the appropriate permits from BAAQMD to operate the generators.

The Specific Plan Update could substantially reduce emissions of regional air pollutants over the long-term through implementation of the above Specific Plan Update policies and standards, including the above TDM standards/TMA requirements, however, the policies and standards would not be capable of reducing the impact to a less than significant level given the magnitude of the impact. 687
A–21
The No Project/Adopted 2013 Specific Plan Alternative and the Reduced Scale Alternative would reduce operational criteria pollutant emissions below BAAQMD thresholds for one of the three operational criteria pollutants that exceed BAAQMD thresholds under the Specific Plan Update as presented in Draft SEIR Section 7.0 Alternatives Pages 443, 447, and 448. The SEIR concluded that although both alternatives would result in reduced operational criteria air pollutant emissions, the alternatives’ emissions would exceed BAAQMD thresholds for two of the three operational criteria pollutants and also result in a significant and unavoidable operational criteria air pollutant emissions impact. Please see Statement of Overriding Considerations below.

GHG Checklist Question a): Would the project generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? Impact GHG-1: The project would generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that would have a significant impact on the environment.

Finding: Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations make additional mitigation measures or alternatives infeasible.

Rationale/Evidence: As stated above, Specific Plan Update Section 8.4.1 Standard 1 requires future development to implement a TDM Plan to reduce daily vehicle trips by 40 percent (which, in turn, reduces mobile GHG emissions). The 40 percent trip reduction is accounted for in the magnitude of GHG emissions disclosed in the SEIR.

In addition, as described in the Final SEIR Text Revisions, the Specific Plan Update Section 8.4.2 Standard 5 requires electric vehicle parking for all future developments to be provided in accordance with CALGreen Tier 2 standards. In addition, future projects will implement Specific Plan Update Section 6.8.1 Standard 2 which requires all future developments to implement the state’s and City’s solid waste minimization standards to increase the rates of recycling and composting of food, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. BAAQMD’s Plan-level GHG thresholds require the Plan Update to meet the state’s goals to reduce emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. No feasible policies or measures within the City’s control as lead agency would reduce the Plan Update GHG emissions sufficiently to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. As described in the SEIR, there is no current pathway for the Specific Plan Update, based on the mechanisms currently available to the City, to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045.

Therefore, the GHG impact is significant and unavoidable. Although the No Project/Adopted 2013 Specific Plan Alternative and the Reduced Scale Alternative would result in lower GHG emissions overall due to the reduced amounts of development compared to the Plan Update, there is no pathway available to the City to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 for the emissions that would be generated by these reduced development alternatives. Please see Statement of Overriding Considerations below.
688
A–22
GHG Checklist Question b): Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs? Impact: The project would conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs.

Finding: Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations make additional mitigation measures or alternatives infeasible.

Rationale/Evidence: As described on Draft SEIR Pages 199 to 201, the Specific Plan Update would include high-density residential and mixed-use neighborhoods in the Specific Plan area. In addition, future projects would be required to implement TDM Plans to reduce vehicle trips by 40 percent. Therefore, the Specific Plan Update is consistent with the goals of Plan Bay Area 2050. The Specific Plan Update would be consistent with the City’s East Palo Alto Climate Action Plan Policies by encouraging the expansion of EV charging infrastructure (in accordance with CALGreen Tier 2 requirements), developing walkable and bikeable street landscape locations by improving the connectivity of sidewalks and including improvements to bicycle facilities, multi-use trails, and paths; and establishing parking policies that encourage public transit, biking, and walking by implementing Specific Plan Update Section 8-5.2 Off-Street Parking Management Strategies. However, Specific Plan Update would not achieve the goal of carbon neutrality by 2045, under the California Air Resources Board Climate Change Scoping Plan and Assembly Bill 1279, as factors outside the City’s control would be required to achieve that goal. As a result, the GHG impact is significant and unavoidable. As described above, Alternatives that would reduce the size of the project would not be able to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 for the same reasons as the Specific Plan Update.

Please see the Statement of Overriding Considerations.

6. Findings for Significant Cumulative Effects
The Final SEIR 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.

Cumulative Air Quality Checklist Question: Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative air quality impact? Impact AIR-C: The project would result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative air quality impact.

Finding: Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations make additional mitigation measures/policies or alternatives infeasible.

Rationale/Evidence: As described on Draft SEIR Page 85, by its very nature, regional air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. Therefore, the conclusions for cumulative plan-level and project-level operational air quality impacts are the same as the conclusions described in the above Impact AIR-2, and Checklist Question a) plan689 A–23
level air quality impacts related to consistency with the 2017 BAAQMD CAP are the same. The implementation of the Specific Plan Update would result in a VMT growth rate higher than the service population growth rate. For this reason, the Specific Plan Update would result in a conflict with the 2017 CAP, contributing to a significant cumulative impact.

Future development would result in operational criterial air pollutant emissions exceeding BAAQMD’s project-level thresholds of significance for ROG, NOx, and PM10 (see discussion under Impact AIR-1). Therefore, future development under the Specific Plan Update would result in a conflict with the 2017 CAP, contributing to a significant cumulative impact. Given the size of the Specific Plan Update, there are no feasible measures to reduce the Specific Plan Update’s contribution to the cumulative air quality impacts to less than cumulatively considerable levels. See above discussions and Statement of Overriding Considerations below.

Cumulative GHG Checklist Question: Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a cumulatively significant GHG emissions impact? Impact: The project would result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative GHG emissions impact.

Finding: Specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations make additional mitigation measures or alternatives infeasible.

Rationale/Evidence: GHG emissions have a broader, global impact; therefore, if a project or Plan exceeds the identified significance thresholds, its emissions would be cumulatively considerable. As discussed under GHG Checklist Questions a) and b), the Specific Plan would result in significant GHG impacts given there is no feasible pathway for the City to ensure the Specific Plan Update would achieve carbon neutrality by 2045, absent actions by other governmental agencies and technological advances that substantially reduce the GHG emissions of current and future uses.

Therefore, the project would have a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative GHG emissions impact. Therefore, the impact is significant and unavoidable. For the above reasons, there are no feasible measures or policies the Specific Plan Update could implement to reduce its cumulatively considerable contribution to the significant cumulative GHG impact.

Please see the Statement of Overriding Considerations.

7. Findings Regarding Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes Which Would be Caused by the Project Should it be Implemented Section 15126.2(c) of the CEQA Guidelines requires a discussion of the significant irreversible changes that would result from implementation of a proposed project.

Potential significant irreversible changes include the (1) irreversible use of 690
A–24
nonrenewable resources, (2) commitment of future generations to similar use, (3) irreversible damage resulting from environmental accidents associated with the project and (4) irretrievable commitments of resources.

Use of Nonrenewable Resources and Irretrievable Commitments of Nonrenewable Resources
Implementation of the Specific Plan Update would result in a substantial increase in demand for nonrenewable resources such as nonrenewable construction material (e.g., concrete, metals, and plastics) and electricity and natural gas during operations; however, as stated in the SEIR, the Specific Plan Update promotes efficient energy use given its infill location, availability of existing infrastructure, high-density mix of uses, and colocation of housing and jobs. Future development implementing the Specific Plan Update would comply with all applicable regulations aimed to reduce energy consumption and promote energy efficiencies including CALGreen requirements (which requires construction and demolition recycling), Title 24 energy efficiency standards, and the City’s Green Building Program requirements, Reach Code, and Construction and Demolition Waste Diversion goals.

Commitment of Future Generations to Similar Uses
Implementation of the Specific Plan Update would commit future generations to more intense development in this area; however, the Specific Plan Update would serve several purposes, including increased use of underutilized land, greater diversity of complimentary uses in the area, increased housing in the City, improved infrastructure, and greater connectivity between the Specific Plan area and the surrounding communities. The Specific Plan Update’s land uses at the proposed higher density would benefit the City and the region by providing a cohesively-planned community within an existing urban area, including the creation of additional housing, jobs, and recreational opportunities.

Irreversible Damage from Environmental Accidents.

Implementation of the Specific Plan Update would not include any new or uniquely hazardous uses, and operation of the future uses are not expected to cause environmental accidents. Implementation of the Specific Plan Update in compliance with existing regulations and policies (including General Plan and Specific Plan Update policies) would not substantially affect the public and surrounding environment due to the release of hazardous materials. The Specific Plan Update would not result in significant geology and soil hazards, with mitigation. As a result, the Specific Plan Update would not result in irreversible damage that may result from environmental accidents.

8. 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 691
A–25
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 Specific Plan Update’s potential growth inducing effects:

The Specific Plan Update Scenario 2 would result, after accounting for existing development to be removed, in a net increase of 1,500 households, approximately 5,015 residents, and 11,340 jobs. Compared to existing conditions, the Specific Plan Update would allow for substantial growth. While the Specific Plan Update is intended to provide a more balanced development pattern with jobs and housing, the Specific Plan Update would not have an equal amount of new housing to serve the net new jobs generated from implementation of the Specific Plan Update. For this reason, demand for additional housing development would likely occur in East Palo Alto outside of the Specific Plan area. Also, given the proximity of other cities to Specific Plan area, potential new workers could choose to live outside the City of East Palo Alto.

However, the amount of growth that the Specific Plan Update would accommodate is consistent with the growth projected for the City and South San Mateo County. Updated regional growth projections are provided in Plan Bay Area 2050. The updated Plan Bay Area 2050 projections for the South San Mateo County area (which includes the City of East Palo Alto, Atherton, Menlo Park, Redwood City, Woodside, Portola Valley, and San Carlos) estimate a total of 106,000 households and 196,000 jobs by 2050. Of the growth projected for the South San Mateo County area in 2050, the net growth associated with the Specific Plan Update represents one and one-half percent of projected households and five percent of projected jobs for Scenario 2. In general, growth is estimated to continue and the amount of development that would result from the Specific Plan Update reflects and accommodates that projected growth.

The beneficial effects of directing projected growth to the Specific Plan area include proactively planning a more sustainable community, developing previously developed land, developing within the existing urban service area, taking advantage of existing infrastructure including transit infrastructure, improving multi-modal transportation infrastructure, and providing housing to address the City’s fair-share housing allocation requirements. The development of dense residential and mixed-use districts, as proposed by the Specific Plan Update, is a more sustainable approach for accommodating projected growth and reducing sprawl, resulting in beneficial effects on both local and regional levels. The Specific Plan Update includes infrastructure improvements to specifically serve the buildout of the Specific Plan Update. The Specific Plan Update does not include improvements that would remove obstacles to population growth or accommodate more development than what is proposed. As a result, the Specific Plan Update would not foster or stimulate significant, unplanned economic or population growth in the surrounding environment.

9. Findings Regarding Project Alternatives
692
A–26
Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (c), the City of East Palo Alto makes the following findings regarding the alternatives considered in the Final SEIR:

1. No Project/No New Development Alternative. The No Project/No New Development alternative would be environmentally superior by avoiding all of the significant impacts resulting from the Plan Update but only meets two of the 17 project objective objectives, partially meets three objectives, and does not meet the remaining 12 objectives. The neighborhood would be maintained and operate similar to existing conditions, buildings would not be subject to the current/more energy efficient California Building Code requirements, and no specific public benefits or infrastructure improvements would be realized. For this reason, the alternative has been rejected.

2. No Project/ Adopted 2013 Specific Plan Alternative. This alternative assumes the Specific Plan area would continue to be built out consistent with the adopted 2013 Specific Plan. The No Project/Adopted 2013 Specific Plan Alternative would result in a net increase of 735 residential units, 1,346,760 square feet of office/R&D space, 140,910 square feet of industrial space, 87,400 square feet of retail space, and 36,000 square feet of civic/community space.

The No Project/ Adopted 2013 Specific Plan Alternative would result in less overall development than the Specific Plan Update. Lesser development equates to less overall light and glare from new development, less overall energy use, less overall construction and operational criteria air pollutant emissions, less overall GHG emissions being generated, less construction and project-generated traffic noise, less demand on public services, and less demand on utilities and service systems.

The Specific Plan Update Scenario 2’s (i.e. approved project’s) operational criteria pollutant emissions would be primarily from vehicle emissions, and would exceed BAAQMD thresholds for ROG, NOx, and PM10, resulting in significant unavoidable impacts. The No Project/Adopted 2013 Specific Plan Alternative would result in reduced operational criteria pollutant emissions for PM10, which would be below the BAAQMD threshold, avoiding the significant and unavoidable impact for this criteria pollutant; however, other criteria pollutants would remain significant and unavoidable as follows: ROG emissions of 109.49 pounds per day, exceeding the 54 pounds per day BAAQMD threshold, and NOx emissions of 55.18 pounds per day, exceeding the 54 pounds per day BAAQMD threshold.

However, the operational ROG emissions for the No Project/Adopted 2013 Specific Plan Alternative would result in 107 pounds per day less emissions compared to Plan Update Scenario 2. Operational NOx emissions for the 2013 Specific Plan would result in 50 pounds per day less emissions compared to Scenario 2. The emissions for PM2.5 would be below BAAQMD thresholds for the No Project/Adopted 2013 Specific Plan and the Specific Plan Update. The No Project/Adopted 2013 Specific Plan Alternative would be environmentally 693
A–27
superior due to substantially reduced operational criteria pollutant emissions compared to the Specific Plan Update.

Similar to the Specific Plan Update, the No Project/Adopted 2013 Specific Plan Alternative would not attain BAAQMD’s Plan-level threshold to reach carbon neutrality by 2045 and, therefore, would result in a significant and unavoidable GHG impact.

The 2013 Specific Plan plus General Plan buildout would result in an average dry weather flow for wastewater of 2.63 million gallons per day (mgd), and 2.79 mgd average annual flow for wastewater, compared to the Plan Update’s average dry weather wastewater flow of 3.14 mgd and average annual flow of

3.33 mgd, which is below East Palo Alto’s contractual treatment capacity of 2.89 mgd average dry weather flow and 3.06 average annual flow. In combination with cumulative development including the General Plan buildout, the Specific Plan Update wastewater flows under cumulative conditions would exceed the City’s current contractual treatment capacity. The No Project/Adopted 2013 Specific Plan Alternative would be environmentally superior due to substantially reduced wastewater generation compared to the Specific Plan Update. In addition, this Alternative would avoid the significant traffic noise impact at Bay Road from the University Avenue to Clark Avenue and Clark Avenue to Pulgas Avenue segments.

The No Project/Adopted 2013 Specific Plan would result in a cumulative daily VMT per capita of 7.04 and VMT per employee of 10.35 (which accounts for the TDM requirement for a 40 percent trip reduction), which result in a less than significant VMT impact. The Specific Plan Update would result in a cumulative daily VMT per capita and employee below the City’s thresholds of 11.68 and

16.38, respectively. The residential VMT per capita Scenario 2 would be 6.70 (which includes the 40 percent trip reduction from implementation of a TDM Plan). The VMT per employee would be 10.39 for the Plan Update. Therefore, this Alternative and the Specific Plan Update would result in a less-thansignificant VMT impact; however, the Alternative would result in a slightly lower VMT per capita and VMT per employee. The remaining impacts for other environmental topics for this Alternative would be similar to the Specific Plan Update’s impacts.

The No Project/Adopted 2013 Specific Plan Alternative would meet 10 objectives and partially meet seven objectives. This Alternative would meet objectives to create smaller, more walkable blocks through the addition of publicly accessible streets, greenways, alleys, and multiuse pathways, maintain key view corridors to the Bay through building setbacks, stepbacks, and linear greenway networks, improve circulation and mobility in the Plan area by increasing the interconnectedness of the network and increasing opportunities to access the Bay/waterfront. This Alternative would partially meet objectives that facilitate the construction of the maximum amount of (deed-restricted) affordable housing by 694
A–28
subsidizing it with linked non-residential development, in order to lessen indirect displacement and meet Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) housing goals and the General Plan Housing Element, enable substantial improvements to the utility systems and other infrastructure in the Specific Plan area, by maximizing the amount of development that can fund these upgrades, and ensure that the local community benefits significantly from new development, and that new developments specifically prioritize those benefits identified by the City.

While this Alternative is environmentally superior compared to the Specific Plan Update, the Alternative would only partially meet key objectives that align with the City’s housing, infrastructure improvement, and community benefit goals. For the above reasons, this Alternative has been rejected.

3. Reduced Scale Alternative. The purpose of the Reduced Scale Alternative is to allow for more development than currently allowed by the 2013 Specific Plan yet avoid some of the Specific Plan Update’s significant and unavoidable impacts that result from the overall scale of development. The amount of development that could occur without resulting in a significant traffic noise impact on Bay Road would be approximately 40 percent, as that would reduce trip volumes a sufficient amount to avoid a three (3) dBA increase, the level below which a traffic noise increase is not perceptible. Therefore, the Reduced Scale Alternative assumes a 40 percent decrease in the development allowed under the Plan Update. This alternative would result in a net increase over existing conditions of 900 residential units, 1,424,410 square feet of office/R&D space, 159,000 square feet for industrial space, 52,440 square feet of retail space, 77,820 square feet of civic/community space, and 32,100 square feet of tenant amenity space.

The Reduced Scale Alternative would result in 40 percent less development than the Specific Plan Update. The reduction in development would result in less overall light and glare from new development, less overall energy use, less overall construction and operational criteria air pollutant emissions, less overall GHG emissions, less construction and project-generated traffic noise, less demand on public services, and less demand on utilities and service systems.

The Reduced Scale Alternative would result in approximately 40 percent less operational criteria pollutant emissions for PM10, which would be below BAAQMD thresholds, avoiding the Plan Update’s significant and unavoidable impact for PM10, but the Reduced Scale Alternative would also result in significant ROG emissions, which would be reduced to approximately 130 pounds per day , yet still exceed the 54 pounds per day BAAQMD threshold. The Reduced Scale Alternative NOx emissions would be reduced to 63 pounds per day (exceeding the 54 pounds per day threshold), and PM10 would be reduce to 70 pounds per day, which is below the BAAQMD threshold of 82 pounds per day. The emissions for PM2.5 would be below BAAQMD thresholds for both the Reduced Scale Alternative and the Specific Plan Update. The Reduced Scale Alternative would 695
A–29
be environmentally superior due to substantially reduced operational criteria pollutant emissions compared to the Specific Plan Update.

Similar to the Specific Plan Update, the Reduced Scale Alternative would not attain BAAQMD’s Plan-level threshold to reach carbon neutrality by 2045 and, therefore, would result in a significant and unavoidable GHG impact.

Under cumulative conditions with the General Plan buildout plus Specific Plan Update, wastewater flows would exceed the City’s current contractual treatment capacity. The cumulative wastewater flow from the Specific Plan Update plus General Plan buildout would be 3.18 million gallons per year, which exceeds the City’s contractual treatment capacity of 2.89 mgd average dry weather flow for wastewater and 3.06 average annual flow for wastewater. The Plan Update’s contribution to the cumulative sewer flow is 0.82 mgd average dry weather flow and 0.87 mgd average annual flow. The Reduced Scale Alternative would generate approximately 40 percent less wastewater than the Plan Update’s sewer flow contribution, which would be 0.49 mgd average dry weather flow and

0.51 mgd average annual flow. The cumulative wastewater flow with the Reduced Scale Alternative would be reduced to 2.78 mgd average dry weather flow and 2.96 mgd average annual flow, which is below the City’s contractual treatment capacity of 2.89 mgd for average dry weather flow and 3.06 mgd average annual flow at PARWQCP Joint Facility. As a result the Reduced Scale Alternative would be environmentally superior due to substantially reduced wastewater generation compared to the Specific Plan Update.

Operational traffic noise from the Specific Plan Update on the Bay Road segments from University Avenue to Clark Avenue, and from Clark Avenue to Pulgas Avenue could reach up to 68 dBA. This increase is four dBA above the existing traffic noise levels on these segments, which exceeds the threshold of three dBA above existing noise levels and the cumulatively considerable level of contributing one dBA above cumulative no project levels, resulting in a significant operational traffic noise impact and cumulative noise impact. Under the Reduced Scale Alternative, a 40 percent reduction in traffic volumes would cause less than a three dBA increase, which is a less than significant increase in roadway noise.

Therefore, the Reduced Scale Alternative would avoid the significant operational traffic noise impact. The Reduced Scale Alternative would be environmentally superior due to substantially reduced traffic noise impacts on Bay Road compared to the Specific Plan Update. The Reduced Scale Alternative would result in similar impacts as the Plan Update related to the other environmental topics such as VMT, hazards and hazardous materials, and biological resources, as the same parcels would be developed and subject to similar amounts of ground disturbance.

This alternative would meet 10 project objectives but would partially meet seven objectives. Similar to the No Project/Adopted 2013 Specific Plan Alternative, the Reduce Scale Alternative would meet objectives to create smaller, more 696
A–30
walkable blocks through the addition of publicly accessible streets, greenways, alleys, and multiuse pathways, maintain key view corridors to the Bay through building setbacks, stepbacks, and linear greenway networks, improve circulation and mobility in the Plan area by increasing the interconnectedness of the network and increasing opportunities to access the Bay/waterfront. This Alternative would partially meet objectives that facilitate the construction of the maximum amount of (deed-restricted) affordable housing by subsidizing it with linked nonresidential development, in order to lessen indirect displacement and meet RHNA housing goals and the General Plan Housing Element, enable substantial improvements to the utility systems and other infrastructure in the Specific Plan area, and ensure that the local community benefits significantly from new development. While this Reduced Scale Alternative is the environmentally superior compared to the Specific Plan Update, the Alternative, by accomplishing 40 percent less overall development than allowed under the Plan Update, would only partially meet key objectives that align with the City’s housing, infrastructure improvement, and community benefit goals. For the above reasons, this Alternative has been rejected.

10. Statement of Overriding Considerations
In approving the Project, the City Council makes the following Statement of Overriding Considerations in support of its findings on the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR). The City Council has considered the information contained in the SEIR and all other public comments, responses to comments, and accompanying technical memoranda and staff reports included in the public record.

The City Council has carefully balanced the benefits of the Project against any adverse impacts identified in the SEIR that could not be feasibly mitigated to a level of insignificance. Notwithstanding the identification and analysis of impacts that are identified in the EIR as being significant and which have not been eliminated, lessened or mitigated to a level of insignificance, the City Council, acting pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15092 and 15093, hereby determines that remaining significant effects on the environment found to be unavoidable, identified in Sections 4 and 5 of the Findings, above, are acceptable due to overriding concerns described herein.

Specifically, the benefits of the Project outweigh the unmitigated adverse impacts and the Project should be approved.

Based on the objective identified in the proposed Project and SEIR, and through extensive public participation, the City Council has determined that the Project should be approved, and any remaining unmitigated environmental impacts attributable to the Project are outweighed by the following specific environmental, economic, fiscal, social, housing and other overriding considerations, each one being a separate and 697
A–31
independent basis upon which to approve the Project. Substantial evidence in the record demonstrates the City would derive the following benefits from adoption and implementation of the Project:

A. The Project provides for a mix of office, retail, industrial/research & development (R&D), single-family, multi-family residential spaces within the Plan Area. These developments will benefit the City by providing more employment and housing opportunities, as well as placing residential development in proximity to new employment opportunities. The Project would expand economic opportunity for residents of the City by providing access to both skilled jobs and attainable living wage jobs. The Project would provide significant fiscal benefits to the City, including increased property values and taxes, payment of development impact fees and commercial linkage fees, and ongoing payment of funds through Measure HH and Measure O.

B. The Project provides for enhanced civic and community spaces within the Plan Area, including providing a framework for providing amenities that benefit residents, such as a new library, community center, space for nonprofit and local organizations, subsidized local merchant or maker spaces, day care and play spaces, resource centers and job training spaces, and recreational and fitness facilities. The Project would increase diversity of activity, mobility choices, and vibrant community spaces.

C. The Project provides for numerous improvements to the vehicle circulation network, transit network, and pedestrian/bicycle network used to access the Plan Area and City including increasing the interconnectedness of the transit network, increasing opportunities to access the bay and waterfront, promote walkability through wide sidewalks, and provide buffered bicycle facilities, to ensure new development reduces its own vehicle trip generation and supports improved public transit in the future.

D. The Project provides for numerous improvements to the public infrastructure of the Plan Area and City, including stormwater, wastewater, and water infrastructure improvements, and improvements to police and fire services, schools, libraries, and parks.

E. The Project incorporates all feasible mitigation measures to reduce potential environmental impacts to the greatest extent feasible. No mitigation measures identified in the SEIR have been found to be infeasible, except where they are within the jurisdiction of another agency.

No feasible mitigation measures or alternatives have been identified to 698
A–32
mitigate the remaining significant and unavoidable adverse effects of the Project.

F. The State of California has made the attainment of decent housing and a suitable living environment for every Californian a statewide priority. As set forth in Government Code Section 65580, the City must facilitate the improvement and development of housing to make adequate provision for the housing needs of all economic segments of the community. Similarly, CEQA recognizes the importance of balancing the prevention of environmental damage with the provision of a decent home and satisfying living environment (See Public Resource Code Section 21000(g).) Furthermore, the City is obligated under state law to provide for its fair share of regional growth, and the City's Housing Element of the General Plan (the "Housing Element") demonstrates that a total of 829 housing units are needed during the sixth housing element cycle to meet the City's fair share. The Project, as described in the staff report, will facilitate the Housing Element goals by including in the list of priority community benefits that could be contributed by a potential future development project housing projects for vulnerable populations, such as large family households and extremely low income households. The Project also implements Housing Element programs and policies by providing for consideration of fee waivers, fee reductions, or deferred payment of development impact fees and permit fees for affordable housing projects, providing for streamlined CEQA review for qualifying affordable residential projects, prioritizing construction of public utilities and infrastructure improvements to serve affordable housing projects, and provide protections for residents displaced as a result of development.

Based on the detailed findings articulated above, the City Council hereby finds that economic and social considerations outweigh the remaining environmental effects of approval and implementation of the Project, and the City Council hereby concludes that the Project should be approved.
699
C–1

EXHIBIT B

MITIGATION MONITORING & REPORTING PROGRAM
Ravenswood Business District/Four Corners Specific Plan Update a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency

AIR QUALITY
Impact AIR-1: Future projects under the Specific Plan Update could result in construction criteria pollutant emissions above BAAQMD thresholds resulting in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant regional air quality impact. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) MM AIR-1.1: Construction criteria pollutant and TAC quantification shall be required for individual projects developed under the Specific Plan Update once construction equipment and phasing details are available through modeling to identify impacts and, if necessary, include measures to reduce emissions below the applicable BAAQMD construction thresholds. Reductions in emissions can be accomplished through, not limited to, the following:  All construction equipment larger than 25 horsepower used at the future development sites for more than two continuous days or 20 hours total shall meet U.S. EPA Tier 4 emission standards for NOx and PM (PM10 and PM2.5),
Project Applicant and Contractors
Prior to project approval and during construction
Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning and Building Divisions Ensure individual projects complete a construction criteria pollutant emissions assessment. All measures will be printed on the project plans Construction criteria pollutant emissions assessment prior to each project approval 700
C–2
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency if feasible, otherwise,
o If use of Tier 4 equipment is not available,
alternatively use equipment that meets U.S. EPA emission standards for Tier 2 or 3 engines and include particulate matter emissions control equivalent to CARB Level 3 verifiable diesel emission control devices that altogether achieve an 85-percent reduction in particulate matter exhaust in comparison to uncontrolled equipment; alternatively (or in combination). o Use of alternatively fueled equipment with lower
NOx emissions that meet the NOx and PM reduction requirements above. o Special equipment that cannot meet the above
requirements must be approved as exempt by the City after considering reasons for requesting an exemption. o Use portable electrical equipment where
commercially available and practicable to complete construction. Construction contractors shall utilize electrical grid power instead of diesel generators when (1) grid power is available at the construction site; (2) when construction of temporary power lines is not necessary in order to provide power to portions of the site distant from existing utility lines; (3) when use of portable extension lines is practicable given construction safety and operational limitations; prior to issuance of permits.
701
C–3
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency and (4) when use of electrical grid power does not significantly compromise construction schedules..  Diesel engines, whether for off road equipment or on
road vehicles, shall not be left idling for more than two minutes, except as provided in exceptions to the applicable state regulations (e.g., traffic conditions, safe operating conditions). The construction sites shall have posted legible and visible signs in designated queuing areas and at the construction site to clearly notify operators of idling limit.  Provide line power to the site during the early phases of construction to minimize the use of diesel-powered stationary equipment.  Utilize low volatile organic compound (VOC) (i.e., ROG emitting) coatings, that are below current BAAQMD requirements (i.e., Regulation 8, Rule 3; Architectural Coatings), for at least 80 percent of all residential and nonresidential interior paints and 80 percent of exterior paints. This includes all architectural coatings applied during both construction and reapplications throughout the project's operational lifetime. At least 80 percent of coatings applied must meet a "super-compliant" VOC standard of less than 10 grams of VOC per liter of paint. For reapplication of coatings during the project's operational lifetime, the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions shall contain a stipulation for low VOC coatings to be used. Examples of "supercompliant" coatings are contained in the South Coast Air Quality Management District's website. 702
C–4
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency  Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting
equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations). Clear signage shall be posted for construction workers at all access points.

Impact AIR-3: Fugitive dust emissions from future projects’ construction diesel exhaust and equipment could result in significant health risk impacts to nearby sensitive receptors. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) MM AIR-3.1: The applicant shall require all construction contractors to implement the best construction measures recommended by BAQMD to reduce fugitive dust emissions. Emission reduction measures will include, at a minimum, the following measures:
 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 miles per hour (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.

Throughout
construction
period
703
C–5
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency  All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when average wind speeds exceed 20 miles per hour  All trucks and equipment, including their tires, shall be washed off prior to leaving the site.
 Unpaved roads providing access to sites located 100 feet or further from a paved road shall be treated with a 6- to 12-inch layer of compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel.  Publicly visible signs shall be posted with the telephone number and name of the 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 General Air Pollution Complaints number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. 
MM AIR-3.2: Future projects which would have construction emissions that exceed BAAQMD thresholds shall implement the following Enhanced Construction Best Management Practices, which include but would not be limited to the measures below. Future project applicants shall submit these measures to the City for approval.  Limit the simultaneous occurrence of excavation,
grading, and ground-disturbing construction activities.  Install wind breaks (e.g., trees, fences) on the
windward side(s) of actively disturbed areas of construction. Wind breaks should have at maximum 50 percent air porosity.

Project Applicant and Contractors
All measures will be printed on the project plans prior to issuance of permits, and the measures implemented during project construction Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division and Building Division Review plan submitted by Project Applicant and Contractors. All measures will be printed on the project plans prior to issuance of permits to ensure that the Project Throughout
construction
period.
704
C–6
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency  Plant vegetative ground cover (e.g., fast-germinating native grass seed) in disturbed areas as soon as possible and watered appropriately until vegetation is established.  Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways from sites with a slope greater than one percent.  Minimize the amount of excavated material or waste
materials stored at the site.
 Hydroseed or apply non-toxic soil stabilizers to
construction areas, including previously graded areas,
that are inactive for at least 10 calendar days.

Contractor implements measures to reduce fugitive dust emissions from construction equipment during construction.

Impact AIR-4: The construction exhaust emissions from future projects could exceed BAAQMD thresholds and may result community health risks for sensitive receptors such as nearby residents. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)MM AIR-4.1: Applicants proposing development of projects within 1,000 feet of existing sensitive receptors as defined by the BAAQMD (e.g., residential uses, schools) shall prepare a site-specific construction health risk assessment (HRA). If the HRA demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the City, that the health risk exposures for adjacent receptors will be less than BAAQMD project-level thresholds, then additional mitigation would not be required. However, if the HRA demonstrates that health risks would exceed BAAQMD project-level thresholds, additional feasible on- and off-site mitigation shall be identified to further reduce risks to the greatest extent practicable.

Project Applicant and Contractors
HRA (Prior to each future project approval) Measures to avoid health risks (During construction) Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division and Building Division Review HRA All measures will be printed on the project plans prior to issuance of permits.

Review HRA prior
to each project
approval
705
C–7
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency Measures to avoid significant construction health risks impacts that could be included in projects, depending on the results of the project-specific HRAs could include:
 Use Tier 4 engines for all off-road equipment greater than 50 horsepower (hp) and operating for more than 20 total hours over the entire duration of construction activities.  Use diesel trucks with 2010 or later compliant model
year engines during construction.
 Use renewable diesel during construction.  Use low-VOC coatings during construction.  Implement fugitive dust best management practices and if necessary, enhanced measures recommended by BAAQMD.  Use portable electrical equipment where
commercially available and practicable to complete construction. Construction contractors shall utilize electrical grid power instead of diesel generators when (1) grid power is available at the construction site; (2) when construction of temporary power lines are not necessary in order to provide power to portions of the site distant from existing utility lines; (3) when use of portable extension lines is practicable given construction safety and operational limitations; and (4) when use of electrical grid power does not compromise construction schedules.  Phase construction appropriate to lower the intensity 706
C–8
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency of emissions at any one location with sensitive receptors.  Provide enhanced air filtration for sensitive receptors adversely affected by project emissions.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact BIO-1: Disturbance or destruction of individual special-status plant species such as the Congdon’s tarplant, alkali milk vetch, and Point Reyes bird’s beak could occur during construction activities associated with future development projects, resulting in a significant impact to these species. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)MM BIO-1.1: Prior to initial ground disturbance for Specific Plan-related projects in salt marsh, tidal slough, and grassland/ruderal habitats as depicted on Figure 3.4-1, a qualified plant ecologist shall conduct an appropriately timed survey for Congdon's tarplant, Alkali milk vetch, and Point Reyes bird's beak within the project footprint, and (as access and visibility allow) a 50-foot buffer around the project footprint. If areas within 50 feet around the project footprint extend into adjacent properties, the buffer area will be surveyed as feasible using binoculars and/or by requesting permission from adjacent landowners. This buffer may be increased by the qualified plant ecologist depending on sitespecific conditions and activities planned in the areas but must be at least 50 feet wide (to the extent that access and visibility allow). Situations for which a greater buffer may be required include proximity to proposed activities expected to generate large volumes of dust, such as grading; potential for project activities to alter hydrology supporting habitat for the species; or proximity to proposed structures that may shade areas farther than 50 feet away.

Project Applicant and Contractors
Prior to ground disturbance
Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division.

Review of a report indicating the results of the special status plan species survey and any designated buffer zones to the satisfaction of the City of East Palo Alto Planning Manager. All measures will be printed on the project plans prior to issuance Once if target special-status species are not found in the impact area or the identified buffer. If the target species, or any other specialstatus plants are found in the impact area or identified buffers, MM BIO1.2 and MM BIO1.3 would be 707
C–9
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency Surveys should be conducted in a year with near-average or above-average precipitation; surveys conducted in a year of below-average rainfall would be considered valid if examination of reference populations of the target species indicate that the species would be detectable if present. The purpose of the survey shall be to assess the presence or absence of special-status plants, including Congdon’s tarplant, alkali milk vetch, and Point Reyes bird’s beak. If the target species are not found in the impact area or the identified buffer, then no further mitigation shall be warranted. If the target species, or any other special-status plants are found in the impact area or identified buffers, MM BIO-1.2 and MM BIO-1.3 would be implemented. of permits. implemented.

See MM BIO 1.2 and 1.3 below for additional details.

MM BIO-1.2: Special-Status Plant Avoidance Buffers. To the extent feasible, and in consultation with a qualified plant ecologist, the project proponent shall submit to the City a design for the proposed project, if feasible, to completely avoid impacts on all populations of special-status plants within the project footprints or within the identified buffers of the impact areas. Avoided special-status plant populations shall be protected by establishing and observing the identified buffer between plant populations and the impact area. All such populations located in the impact area or the identified buffer, and their associated designated avoidance areas, shall be clearly depicted on any construction plans. In addition, prior to initial ground disturbance or vegetation removal, the limits of the identified buffer around special-status plants to be Project Applicant and Contractors
Prior to ground disturbance
Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division Review design for the proposed project to avoid impacts on all populations of special-status plants within the project footprints or within the identified buffers of the impact areas.

Once (if avoidance of impacts to special-status species plants is feasible). If complete avoidance of impacts to special status species and more than 10 percent of a population 708
C–10
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency avoided shall be marked in the field (e.g., with flagging, fencing, paint, or other means appropriate for the site in question). This marking shall be maintained intact and in good condition throughout project-related construction activities. If complete avoidance is not feasible and more than 10 percent of a population (by occupied area or individuals) would be impacted as determined by a qualified plant ecologist, MM BIO-1.3 shall be implemented.

Review the limits of the identified buffer around special-status plants to be avoided. would be impacted as determined by a qualified plant ecologist, MM BIO-1.3 shall be implemented.

MM BIO-1.3: Preserve and Manage Mitigation Populations of Special-Status Plants. If avoidance of special-status plants is not feasible and more than 10 percent of the population would be impacted, compensatory mitigation shall be provided via the preservation, enhancement, and management of occupied habitat for the species, or the creation and management of a new population. To compensate for impacts on special-status plants, habitat occupied by the affected species shall be preserved and managed in perpetuity at a minimum 1:1 mitigation ratio (at least one plant preserved for each plant impacted, and at least one occupied acre preserved for each occupied acre affected), for any impact over the 10 percent significance threshold. Alternately, seed from the population to be impacted may be harvested and used either to expand an existing population (by a similar number/occupied area to compensate for impacts to special-status plants beyond the 10 percent significance threshold) or establish an entirely new population in suitable habitat. Areas proposed to be preserved as compensatory mitigation Project Applicant and Contractors (including qualified plant ecologist) Prior to ground disturbance (Preparation HMMP) During construction and project operations (monitoring measures at the compensatory mitigation site) Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division Approval of the HMMP by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or California Department of Fish and Wildlife shall be required if the impacted plant species is Review and approve HMMP developed by the qualified biologist restoration ecologist Review areas proposed to be preserved as compensatory mitigation for impacts to special-status status plant species Review HMMP (Once) Monitoring measures at the mitigation sites (a minimum of 5 years for preserved special-status plan populations and a minimum of 10 years for enhanced or established populations) 709
C–11
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency for impacts to special-status plants must contain verified extant populations of the species, or in the event that enhancement of existing populations or establishment of a new population is selected, the area must contain suitable habitat for the species as identified by a qualified plant ecologist. Mitigation areas shall be managed in perpetuity to encourage persistence and even expansion of this species. Mitigation lands cannot be located on land that is currently held publicly for resource protection unless substantial enhancement of habitat quality will be achieved by the mitigation activities. The mitigation habitat shall be of equal or greater habitat quality compared to the impacted areas, as determined by a qualified plant ecologist, in terms of soil features, extent of disturbance, vegetation structure, and dominant species composition, and shall contain at least as many individuals of the species as are impacted by project activities. The permanent protection and management of mitigation lands shall be ensured through an appropriate mechanism, such as a conservation easement or fee title purchase. A habitat mitigation and monitoring plan (HMMP) shall be developed by a qualified biologist or restoration ecologist and implemented for the mitigation lands on a project-by-project basis. Approval of the HMMP by the City U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or California Department of Fish and Wildlife shall be required if the impacted plant species is listed under the Federal and/or California Endangered Species Act, and for non-listed species, approval by the City shall be required before project impacts occur to the species. listed under the Federal and/or California Endangered Species Act Ensure permanent protection and management of mitigation lands through an appropriate mechanism, such as a conservation easement or fee title purchase. 710
C–12
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency The HMMP shall include, at a minimum, the following information:
 A summary of habitat impacts and the proposed
mitigation;
 A description of the location and boundaries of the
mitigation site and description of existing site conditions;  A description of measures to be undertaken to
enhance (e.g., through focused management that may include removal of invasive species in adjacent suitable but currently unoccupied habitat) the mitigation site for the species;  A description of measures to transplant individual
plants or seeds from the impact area to the mitigation site, if appropriate (which will be determined by a qualified plant or restoration ecologist) ), as well as a requirement that any salvaging or transplanting of plants occur in accordance with appropriate best management practices for minimizing the spread of plant pathogens (https://www.suddenoakdeath.org/welcome-tocalphytos-org-phytophthoras-in-nativehabitats/resources/);  Proposed management activities to maintain highquality habitat conditions for the species;  A description of habitat and species monitoring measures on the mitigation site, including specific,
711
C–13
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency objective final and performance criteria, monitoring methods, data analysis, reporting requirements, monitoring schedule, etc. At a minimum, performance criteria will include demonstration that any plant population fluctuations over the monitoring period of a minimum of 5 years for preserved populations and a minimum of 10 years for enhanced or established populations do not indicate a downward trajectory in terms of reduction in numbers and/or occupied area for the preserved mitigation population that can be attributed to management (i.e., that are not the result of local weather patterns, as determined by monitoring of a nearby reference population, or other factors unrelated to management); and  Contingency measures for mitigation elements that do
not meet performance criteria.

MM BIO-2.1: Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse and Salt Marsh Wandering Shrew Minimization Measure. Any development projects, including the loop road or multi-use path, within 100 feet of an area identified as salt marsh, open water, or tidal slough shall be subject to a habitat assessment prepared by a qualified biologist. All habitats identified by the biologist as suitable habitat for the salt marsh harvest mouse or salt marsh wandering shrew shall be avoided for development and preserved in their existing state, to the extent feasible. If avoidance of salt marsh habitats is infeasible, the following measures shall be implemented:
 Before any construction activities begin, a qualified biologist shall conduct a training session for all
Project Applicant and Contractors (including a qualified biologist) Habitat assessment prior to issuance of Planning permit Training session prior to construction All other measures during construction Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division and in coordination with the Public Works Department.

Review and approve the Habitat Assessment for projects within 100 feet of salt marsh, open water, or tidal slough prior to construction. Ensure measures to protect the salt marsh Review Habitat Assessment (Once) Oversight of preconstruction and construction measures for the harvest mouse and wandering shrew (Throughout construction 712
C–14
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency construction personnel. At a minimum, the training shall include descriptions of the salt marsh harvest mouse and salt marsh wandering shrew, their habitats, the laws protecting them, the general measures that are being implemented to conserve the species as they relate to the project, and the boundaries within which the project may be accomplished.  To avoid the loss of individual harvest mice or shrews from any excavation, fill, or construction activities in suitable habitat, vegetation removal will be limited to the minimum amount necessary to permit the activity to occur. Wherever feasible, sufficient suitable habitat, as determined by a qualified biologist, will remain adjacent to the activity area to provide refugia for displaced individuals.  Within areas where vegetation potentially supporting
salt marsh harvest mice or salt marsh wandering shrews will be impacted, vegetation and debris that could provide cover for mice will be removed using only hand tools (which may include motorized equipment such as line trimmers if the vegetation removed is inspected by a qualified biologist and does not contain any salt marsh harvest mice or salt marsh wandering shrews) at least one week prior to the commencement of construction activities. Vegetation removal will occur under the supervision of a qualified biologist. This vegetation will be removed on a progressive basis, such that the advancing front of vegetation removal moves toward vegetation that would not be disturbed. If necessary, temporary If the salt marsh harvest mouse or wandering shrew are discovered during vegetation removal/construction activities and will not move on its own, the biologist will confer with the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) to identify appropriate measures to avoid impacts to the animal. harvest mouse and wandering shrew are shown on approved construction plans and implemented prior to and during construction. period)
713
C–15
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency shelter consisting of dead vegetation may be positioned to provide escape routes to suitable habitat. A qualified biologist will monitor the vegetation removal and make specific recommendations with respect to the rate of vegetation removal (to ensure that any harvest mice or shrews present are able to escape to cover that will not be impacted), and whether vegetation needs to remain in a certain area temporarily to facilitate dispersal of mice into habitat outside the impact area.  All cut vegetation, except cut vegetation left in place as escape cover, will be removed daily from vegetation removal areas to prevent it from being used as refugia by salt marsh harvest mice.  If a salt marsh harvest mouse or salt marsh wandering shrew, or an animal that may be a salt marsh harvest mouse or salt marsh wandering shrew, is detected during vegetation removal or other project activities, all work that could impact the individual will cease until the animal has moved out of the impact area on its own. A qualified biologist will monitor the animal to ensure that it disperses out of the impact area. If the animal will not move on its own, the biologist will confer with the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) to identify appropriate measures to avoid impacts to the animal. No salt marsh harvest mice or salt marsh wandering shrews will be handled (even for relocation) without prior approval from the USFWS and CDFW. 714
C–16
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency  Following the hand-removal of vegetation, exclusion
fencing will be erected as needed between construction areas and harvest mouse/shrew habitat that is to remain unimpacted to define and isolate protected harvest mouse/shrew habitat. This fencing will consist of material that cannot be climbed by harvest mice, buried at least 4 inches below the ground's surface, and with at least 1 ft (but no more than 4 ft) above the ground. All supports for the fencing will be placed on the inside of the work area. A minimum 2-ft buffer will be maintained free of vegetation around the outside of the exclusion fencing. The fencing will be inspected daily during construction, and any necessary repairs will be made within 24 hours of when they are found. If any breaks in the fencing are found, the qualified biologist will inspect the work area for salt marsh harvest mice and salt marsh wandering shrews.
 During construction, a qualified biologist will be oncall to check underneath vehicles and equipment for salt marsh harvest mice and salt marsh wandering shrews before such equipment is moved, unless the equipment is surrounded by harvest mouse exclusion fencing.  No animals (e.g., dogs or cats) will be brought to the project site by project personnel to avoid harassment, killing, or injuring of wildlife.  The project site will be maintained trash-free, and
food refuse will be contained in secure bins and removed daily during construction, to avoid attracting 715
C–17
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency nuisance animals that may then prey on salt marsh harvest mice.  Nighttime work will be avoided if feasible. If avoidance of night work is infeasible, all project lighting will be shielded and directed away from tidal marshes.  Construction activities within 10 feet of the high tide line shall not occur within two hours before or after extreme high tides (6.5 feet or above, as measured at the Golden Gate Bridge and adjusted to the timing of local high tides), when the marsh plan is inundated, because protective cover for these species is limited and activities could prevent them from reaching available cover.  In either configuration, with or without the loop road, salt marsh and upland grassland habitats, which may be used for foraging and high-tide refugia by both species, would be located immediately adjacent to the new road and pathways. Therefore, dense upland ecotone/transitional salt marsh vegetation shall be planted along the immediate edge of the shoulder of the loop road or multi-use path adjacent to salt marsh and upland grassland habitats to provide high-tide refugia for both species.  In order to provide a barrier between transitional salt marsh and upland grassland habitats and the newly constructed loop road or multi-use path, and to discourage loop road/multi-use path users from entering potential habitats used by salt marsh harvest mice and salt marsh wandering shrews, a low (less than three feet tall) symbolic fence or wall with 716
C–18
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency educational signs prohibiting entry shall be placed along the edge of the developed area, between the developed area and the upland ecotone to be added as described above.

MM BIO-2.2: Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse and Salt Marsh Wandering Shrew Compensatory Mitigation. Compensatory mitigation for individual project impacts, including the loop road or multi-use path, on the salt marsh harvest mouse and salt marsh wandering shrew habitat will be provided via the purchase of credits from a conservation bank or mitigation bank that has restored suitable salt marsh habitat for these species; project-specific mitigation via the preservation and management of suitable habitat for this species; or some combination of the two approaches. If no USFWS/CDFWapproved conservation banks specifically for these mammals are available, credits in a tidal wetland mitigation bank that provides suitable habitat for, and is expected to be occupied by, these species would be adequate. Compensatory mitigation shall be provided at a minimum ratio of 2:1 (mitigation to impact) on an acreage basis if project-specific mitigation is performed or 1:1 if credits are purchased from a mitigation or conservation bank. Compensatory mitigation shall be provided for any potentially suitable habitat for these species that is permanently lost to development or that is present within 50 feet of any new or higher-intensity lighting installed by Specific Plan activities. If project-specific mitigation is provided as compensatory mitigation, the applicant will engage a qualified plant or restoration ecologist to prepare an HMMP describing the Project Applicant and Contractors (including a qualified biologist) Prior to ground disturbance (Preparation HMMP) During construction and project operations (monitoring measures at the compensatory mitigation site) Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division and in coordination with Public Works Department and Community Services Division Review and approve HMMP developed by the qualified biologist restoration ecologist Review areas proposed to be preserved as compensatory mitigation for impacts to special-status status plant species Ensure permanent protection and management of mitigation lands through an Review HMMP (Once) Compensatory measures until success criteria for the habitat and species are met (a minimum of 5 years) 717
C–19
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency measures that will be taken to create, restore, or enhance habitat for the salt marsh harvest mouse and salt marsh wandering shrew and monitor the effects of the mitigation on these species. The HMMP will include, at a minimum, the following:
 A summary of project impacts on the species and the
proposed mitigation of these impacts;
 A description of the location and boundaries of the
mitigation site and description of existing site conditions;  A description of measures to be undertaken to
enhance (e.g., through focused management) the mitigation site for the species;  Proposed management activities (e.g., management
of invasive plants) to maintain high-quality habitat conditions for the species;  A description of community and species monitoring
measures on the mitigation site, including specific, objective goals and objectives, performance indicators, success criteria, monitoring methods, data analysis, reporting requirements, and monitoring schedule. At a minimum, success criteria shall include demonstration that habitat conditions are suitable for occupancy by the salt marsh harvest mouse and salt marsh wandering shrew, and that either a) at least one of these species is present, or b) the site is connected to pre-existing, suitable, and presumably occupied habitat so that colonization of the mitigation site is determined to be likely by a qualified biologist. appropriate mechanism, such as a conservation easement or fee title purchase. 718
C–20
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency Monitoring will occur until these criteria are achieve but for no less than five years.  A description of the HMMP’s adaptive component,
including potential contingency measures for mitigation elements that do not meet performance criteria; and  A description of the funding mechanism to ensure the
long-term maintenance and monitoring of the mitigation lands.

The HMMP shall be prepared by a qualified plant or restoration ecologist. Approval of the HMMP by the City shall be required before project impacts occur to the species.

MM BIO-2.3: Prohibit Rodenticides. The use of rodenticides shall not be allowed within 100 feet of any salt marsh habitat.

Review project design of developments adjacent to the salt marsh habitat to determine if the project is subject to this measure, and if subject, Planning permit to include measures to prohibit the use of rodenticides Prior to issuance of Planning permit
719
C–21
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency within 100 feet of the marsh habitat.

MM BIO-2.4: Restrict Pesticide Use in and near Salt Marsh Habitats. All pesticides used within 100 feet of salt marsh habitats must be utilized in accordance with the manufacturer’s directions, and pesticides shall not be stored, loaded, or mixed within 300 feet of any salt marsh or open water/tidal slough habitat unless the user's property is located entirely within 300 feet of those habitats (in which case offsite storage may be infeasible). No pesticides shall be applied within tidal marsh habitats as part of Specific Plan Update activities. Any pesticides used in areas where they could be washed, or could drift via wind, into tidal marsh habitat must be approved by the City of East Palo Alto for use in aquatic habitats.

Project Applicant and Property Owners
Prior to issuance of Planning permit
Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division and in coordination with Public Works Department and Community Services Division Review project design of developments adjacent to the salt marsh habitat to determine if the project is subject to this measure, and if subject, Planning permit to include measures to restrict pesticide use.

Once prior to issuance of Planning permit
MM BIO-2.5: Raptor Perch Deterrents. Within 300 feet of any salt marsh habitats within or adjacent to the Specific Plan area, raptor perch deterrents will be placed on any edges of building roofs, terraces, or other structures (e.g., light poles or electrical towers) that are high enough to overlook the marsh and that have an unobstructed view to the marsh. The specific type of perch deterrent(s) used shall be approved by a qualified biologist and the City but shall not include flagging or other wind-activated materials, or any deterrents that include lights.

Project Applicant and Contractors (including a qualified biologist) Prior to Planning permit approval
Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division and Building Review project design for developments within 300 feet of salt marsh habitats. Review and Review project design, including perch deterrent types, prior to issuance of Planning permit 720
C–22
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency Division and in coordination with the Public Works Department and Community Services Division approve the types of perch deterrents recommended by the biologist.

MM BIO-2.6: Landscape Design. To avoid perches for avian predators and dense woody vegetation that could hide mammalian predators of salt marsh harvest mouse and salt marsh wandering shrew, new landscaping, as well as the size, location and species of any new or replacement public street trees, within 300 feet of salt marsh habitats shall be reviewed by a qualified biologist familiar with these species’ ecology prior to City approval to ensure that no new landscaping poses a threat to these two mammals. Intervening structures, topography, and other features that may block the view of the tidal marsh from avian predators using proposed trees shall be considered by the biologist.

Project Applicant and Contractors (including a qualified biologist) Prior to Planning permit approval
Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division and in coordination with the Public Works Department and Community Services Division Review project design and landscaping plans for developments within 300 feet of salt marsh habitats.

Once prior to Planning permit approval
MM BIO-2.7: Restrictions on Outdoor Cat Feeding Stations and Off-Leash Dogs. Future developments shall prohibit
outdoor cat feeding stations within 300 feet of salt marsh habitats. Future developments shall also prohibit off-leash dogs within 100 feet of salt marsh habitats unless within fenced areas.

Project Applicant and Project Owners
Prior to issuance of Planning permits and during project operations Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Review project design for developments within 300 feet of salt marsh habitat prior to Review project design once prior to issuance of Planning permit 721
C–23
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency Department, Planning Division
Planning permit approval to ensure no outdoor feeding stations are provided. Permit conditions to preclude outdoor feeding stations and off-leash dogs .

MM BIO-2.8: Food Waste Management. The following measures shall be implemented by future developments within 100 feet of salt marsh habitats to reduce impacts on salt marsh harvest mice and salt marsh wandering shrews due to the attraction of nuisance predators:
 Any bins used for food waste shall include lids that
seal tightly to prevent access by animals and incorporate a mechanism to prevent them from being inadvertently left open when not in active use.  Outdoor trash and recycling receptacles shall be
emptied frequently enough that cans do not fill up and allow food waste to spill out. Any observations of overflowing or non-functioning trash bins shall be reported to those responsible for emptying the bins, and to the City, to ensure that they are emptied when Project Applicants and Project Owners
Prior to Planning permit approval, building occupancy and during project operations Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division Review project design for developments within 100 feet of salt marsh habitat prior to Planning permit approval. Ensure educational signs prohibiting feeding wildlife and feral animals on the property, Review of project design (once prior to Planning permit approval) Ensure educational signs are posted (once prior to building occupancy) 722
C–24
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency necessary.
 Litter on the site shall be picked up daily, and no food trash is left on-site overnight.
 Signs shall be placed on trash and recycling
receptacles reminding users to close the lids so that they will not be inadvertently left open.  Residents and visitors shall be prohibited from feeding feral or wild mammals.
 Educational signs shall be posted explaining the
importance and sensitivity of nearby marsh habitats, prohibiting feeding wildlife and feral animals on the property, prohibiting off-leash dogs, and advising residents and visitors to dispose of food waste in outdoor areas appropriately to avoid attracting and subsidizing nuisance species. prohibiting offleash dogs, and advising residents and visitors to dispose of food waste in outdoor areas appropriately to avoid attracting and subsidizing nuisance species are posted.

Impact BIO-3: Future project construction could result in the loss of California black rail and/or California Ridgway’s rail populations and their habitats, which would constitute a significant impact. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) MM BIO-3.1: Seasonal Avoidance or Protocol-level Surveys and Buffers around Calling Centers. The mitigation measures described below may be modified or substituted with equivalent mitigation that achieves the same or greater reduction of impacts, if approved in writing by the City and applicable regulatory agencies.

To avoid causing the abandonment of an active California Ridgway’s rail or California black rail nest, independent project activities within 700 feet of salt marsh habitats within or adjacent to the Specific Plan area will be avoided during the Project Applicant and Contractors (including a qualified biologist) Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit for construction occurring during the rail breeding season Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division USFWS and CDFW Review protocollevel surveys to confirm construction buffer area from salt marsh habitat for the Ridgway’s rail and black rail. If rails are Once to review protocol-level surveys to establish buffer area from salt marsh habitat 723
C–25
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency rail breeding season (from February 1 through August 31) unless 1) a qualified biologist in coordination with USFWS and CDFW determines that a reduced buffer (but no less than 200 feet) is appropriate due to intervening development or obstructions, the level of disturbance by the activity (in terms of noise and equipment), or other factors that would reduce the potential for the activity to disturb nesting rails, or 2) protocol-level surveys are conducted by a qualified biologist to determine rail locations and territories during the year in which construction is initiated. Protocol-level surveys are typically initiated in late January, so proactive planning is necessary to ensure that such surveys are conducted according to the protocol during the year in which construction occurs.

If breeding rails are determined to be present, construction activities shall not occur within 700 feet of an identified California Ridgway’s rail calling center or within 300 feet of a California black rail calling center during the breeding season unless the USFWS and CDFW provide guidance regarding the types of activities that may occur within lesser distances from calling centers, in which case USFWS and CDFW guidance shall be followed. if construction within the 700 foot buffer from the salt marsh habitat occurs during breeding season or if construction will occur within 700 feet of a California Ridgway’s rail calling center or 300 feet of a black rail’s calling center during breeding season. discovered, review and approve buffer areas between the calling centers.

Impact BIO-4: Future projects’ construction activities that occur in or near the tidal salt marsh, open water, or tidal slough habitats, could result in significant impacts to special-status species fish. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) 724
C–26
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency MM BIO-4.1: Worker Environmental Awareness Training.

Personnel working on projects within or adjacent to salt marsh, open water, or tidal slough habitats shall be trained by a qualified biologist in the importance of the marine environment to special-status fish and other aquatic animals and plants, and the environmental protection measures put in place to prevent impacts to these species, their habitats, and essential fish habitat (EFH). The training session shall include the information described in MM BIO-2.1, as well as the following:
 A review of the special-status fish, other aquatic
animals and plants, and sensitive habitats that could be found in or near the work areas;  Measures to avoid and minimize adverse effects to
special-status fish, other aquatic animals and plants, their habitats, and EFH; and  A review of all conditions and requirements of
environmental permits, reports, and plans (e.g., USACE permits).

Project Applicant and Contractors (including a qualified biologist) Prior to construction
Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division, Building Division and Public Works Department Project applicant to provide documentation of a contract with a qualified biologist to complete worker awareness training Once prior to issuance of grading or building permit.

MM BIO-4.2: Water Quality Protection. During construction, the project applicant shall employ standard construction best management practices (BMPs) to protect water quality. These BMPs may include but are not limited to the following:
 Sediment mitigation measures shall be in place prior
to the onset of project construction and shall be monitored and maintained until construction activities have been completed. Temporary stockpiling of excavated or imported material shall occur only in Project Applicant and Contractors
During construction
Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division, Building Division Confirm construction BMPs to protect water quality are included on the project applicant’s construction plans Once prior to issuance of grading or building permit.
725
C–27
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency approved construction staging areas. Stockpiles that are to remain on the site throughout the wet season shall be protected to prevent erosion.  No litter, debris, or sediment shall be dumped into
storm drains. Daily trash and debris removal shall occur at the site.  All litter and construction debris shall be disposed of off-site in accordance with state and local regulations. All trash and debris within the work area shall be placed in containers with secure lids before the end of work each day in order to reduce the likelihood of predators being attracted to the site by discarded food wrappers and other rubbish that may be left onsite. If containers meeting these criteria are not available, all rubbish shall be removed from the project site at the end of each work day.  Equipment staging and parking of vehicles shall occur on established access roads and flat surfaces.
 The integrity and effectiveness of construction fencing and erosion control measures shall be inspected on a daily basis. Corrective actions and repairs shall be carried out immediately for fence breaches and ineffective BMPs.  Fueling, washing, and maintenance of vehicles shall
occur in developed habitat, away from all tidal salt marsh, open water, and tidal slough habitats. Equipment shall be regularly maintained to avoid fuel leaks. Any leaks shall be captured in containers until equipment is moved to a repair location. Hazardous materials shall be stored only within the developed and Public Works Department.
726
C–28
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency habitat. Containment and cleanup plans shall be prepared and put in place for immediate cleanup of fluid or hazardous materials spills.  Absorbent materials designated for spill containment
and clean-up activities shall be available on project sites for use in an accidental spill.  At no time shall sediment-laden water be allowed to
enter the salt marsh, open water, or tidal slough habitats.

Impact BIO-5: Future projects’ construction activities that occur in proximity to active burrows could result in the injury or loss of burrowing owls, resulting in a significant impact to these species. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) MM BIO-5.1: Burrowing Owl Minimization Measures. To
reduce impacts on burrowing owls, the following shall be implemented:
 Preconstruction Surveys. Preconstruction surveys for
burrowing owls shall be conducted prior to the initiation of construction activities within suitable burrowing owl roosting or nesting habitat (i.e., grassland or ruderal habitats), or within 250 feet of this habitat. During the initial site visit, a qualified biologist shall survey the entire project site and (to the extent that access allows) areas within 250 feet by walking transects with centerlines no more than 50 feet apart and ensure complete visual coverage and looking for suitable burrows that could be used by burrowing owls. If no suitable burrows are present, no additional surveys are required.

Project Applicant and Contractors (including a qualified biologist) Prior to and during construction
Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division Passive relocation Review preconstruction survey results Review construction buffer areas from burrowing owl roosting or nesting habitat. Review plan for passive relocation Review preconstruction surveys and buffer zone once. Review plan for passive relocation once 727
C–29
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency If suitable burrows are determined to be present within 250 feet of project impact areas, a qualified biologist shall conduct a second survey to determine whether owls are present in areas where they could be affected by proposed activities. The survey shall last a minimum of three hours, beginning one hour before sunrise and continuing until two hours after sunrise, or beginning two hours before sunset and continuing until one hour after sunset. The first survey may occur up to 14 days prior to the start of construction activities in any given area, and the second survey shall be conducted within two days prior to the start of construction activities.  Implement Buffer Zones for Burrowing Owls. If
burrowing owls are detected during the pre-activity survey, a 165-foot buffer, within which no newly initiated construction-related activities should occur, will be maintained between construction activities and occupied burrows to the extent feasible during the nonbreeding season (September 1 through January 31). This buffer may be reduced if a qualified biologist determines that work will not result in damage to the burrow(s) being used by the owls. Though the species is highly unlikely to breed in the Specific Plan area, owls present between February 1 and August 31 will be assumed to be nesting, and a 250-foot protected area will remain in effect until August 31, or until the burrow is no longer occupied, whichever occurs first. of owls must be approved by CDFW
728
C–30
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency  Passive Relocation. No burrowing owls shall be
relocated from burrows during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31). If, during the nonbreeding season (September 1 through January 31), it is infeasible to maintain a buffer around occupied burrow(s) large enough to ensure that the burrow(s) will not be physically disturbed (thus risking injury or mortality of the owl), the owl may be passively relocated from the occupied burrow(s) using one-way doors. Passive relocation shall be performed only by a qualified biologist. One-way doors must be in place for a minimum of 48 hours, during dry conditions, to ensure that owls have left the burrow before the burrow is impacted.

Impact BIO-6: Future project activities in the northwest corner of the Specific Plan area occur within 600 feet of active nests, construction activities could result in the abandonment of nests, and possibly the loss of eggs or young western snowy plover, resulting in a significant impact to these species. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) MM BIO-6.1: Seasonal Avoidance and Buffers. No Specific Plan Update construction activities shall be performed within 600 feet of an active snowy plover nest during the snowy plover breeding season, March 1 through September 14. Prior to the initiation of any activities within 300 feet of the southwest corner of Pond SF 2, north of the Specific Plan area during the period March 1 through September 14, a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey for suitable habitat for nesting snowy plovers, and for active nests. If no suitable nesting habitat or active nests are present within 600 feet of the proposed activity, construction may proceed. If an active nest Project Applicant and Contractors (including a qualified biologist) for sites within 600 feet of active nest Prior to construction activities occurring March 1 through September 14 Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division and Building Division.

Review preconstruction survey results
Review preconstruction surveys once.
729
C–31
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency is present, no construction activities shall commence within 600 feet of the nest until the nest is no longer active.Impact BIO-7: Construction disturbance during the bird nesting season (typically February 1 through August 31) could result in the incidental loss of eggs or nestlings of native birds, either directly through the destruction or disturbance of active nests or indirectly by causing enough disturbance to result adult birds abandoning their nests. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) MM BIO-7.1: To minimize impacts on nesting birds, the
following shall be implemented:
 Seasonal Avoidance and Buffers. To the extent
feasible, vegetation removal, demolition, and initiation of grading and other construction activities should be scheduled to avoid the nesting season. If such activities take place outside the nesting season, all impacts on nesting birds protected under the MBTA and California Fish and Game code will be avoided. The nesting season for most birds in San Mateo County extends from February 1 through August 31.  Preconstruction/Pre-disturbance Surveys. If it is not possible to schedule vegetation removal, demolition, and construction activities between September 1 and January 31, then preconstruction surveys for nesting birds shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to ensure that no nests of migratory birds will be disturbed during project implementation. These surveys shall be conducted no more than seven days prior to the initiation of tree removal, demolition, Project Applicant and Contractors (including a qualified biologist) Prior to construction occurring during February 1 through August 31 Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division and in coordination with the Building Division.

Review preconstruction survey results Review construction buffer areas from suitable nesting bird habitat Review preconstruction surveys once. Review construction buffer areas prior to preconstruction survey once 730
C–32
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency ground disturbance, or construction activities for each construction phase. During this survey, the biologist shall inspect all potential nesting habitats (e.g., trees, shrubs, buildings, electrical towers, and the ground) in and immediately adjacent to the impact areas for migratory bird nests.  Buffers. If an active nest is found within areas that would be disturbed by project activities, the qualified biologist shall determine the extent of a constructionfree buffer zone to be established around the nest (typically 300 feet for raptors and 100 feet for other species, though buffers may be reduced by the biologist based on intervening structures or vegetation, the magnitude of disturbance produced by the activity, and the level of human activity to which the birds are already habituated), to ensure that no active nests of species protected by the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code will be disturbed during project implementation.  Inhibition of Nesting. If construction activities will not be initiated until after the start of the nesting season, all potential nesting substrates (e.g., bushes, trees, grasses, and other vegetation) that are scheduled to be removed by the project may be removed prior to the start of the nesting season (e.g., prior to February 1) to reduce the potential for establishment of nests in areas to be disturbed. 731
C–33
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency Impact BIO-8: Increased lighting from future development adjacent to sensitive habitats could result in a significant impact on wildlife such as indirectly increasing predation and bird collisions. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) MM BIO-8.1: Exterior lighting shall be minimized (e.g., by turning lights off) in accordance with recommendations from the International Dark-Sky Association from midnight until dawn, at a minimum, except as needed for safety and City code compliance. Exterior lighting within the Specific Plan area shall be shielded to block illumination from shining upward or outward into the sensitive habitats (i.e., salt marshes) within and adjacent to the Specific Plan area. Uplighting shall be avoided.

MM BIO-8.2: Spillage of lighting from building interiors shall be minimized using occupancy sensors, dimmers, blinds, or other mechanisms from midnight until dawn, at a minimum, during migration seasons (February through May and August through November).

Project Applicant and Contractors
Prior to issuance of building permits and building occupancy Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division and Building Division Ensure that lighting standards are included on the project applicant’s plans Inspect building lighting and sensors Review applicant’s plans prior to issuance of building permits. Inspect building lighting and sensors once, prior to building occupancy.

Impact BIO-9: Construction and operation of future development would result in soil disturbance adjacent to sensitive salt marsh and tidal slough habitats which could result in the spread of non-native plant species in wetland areas in and adjacent to the Specific Plan area. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) MM BIO-9.1: Implement Invasive Weed Best Management
Practices (BMPs). The invasion and/or spread of noxious weeds will be avoided by the use of the following invasive weed BMPs:
 Prohibit the use of moderate or highly invasive and/or noxious weed (as defined by California Department of Food and Agriculture and California Invasive Plant Project Applicant and Contractors
During and postconstruction Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Include BMPs on project construction and landscaping plans. Planning Permit Review plans prior to issuance of grading or building permit. 732
C–34
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency Council) for landscaping.
 During project construction, all seeds and straw
materials used in the Specific Plan area shall be certified weed-free rice (or similar material acceptable to the City) straw, and all gravel and fill material will be certified weed-free to the satisfaction of the City. Any deviation from this will be approved by the City.  During project construction within, or within 100 feet of, tidal salt marsh, open water, or tidal slough habitats, vehicles and all equipment shall be washed (including wheels, undercarriages, and bumpers) before and after entering the proposed project footprint. Vehicles will be cleaned at existing construction yards or car washes.  Following construction of project, a standard erosion control seed mix (acceptable to the City) from a local source, and free of invasive species, will be planted within the temporary impact zones on any disturbed ground that will not be under hardscape, landscaped, or maintained. This will minimize the potential for the germination of the majority of seeds from nonnative, invasive plant species.  To avoid mobilizing weed seeds, use of landscaping
blowers within 100 feet of the edge of salt marsh is prohibited.

Planning Division and the Public Works Department
to include condition prohibiting landscaping blowers within 100 feet of salt marsh Impact BIO-10: Future projects adjacent to the salt marsh habitat could result in a significant impact to jurisdictional waters of the state or U.S. habitat. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) MM BIO-10.1: Jurisdictional Waters Avoidance and Project During or prior to Oversight of Review results of Review results of 733
C–35
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency Minimization Measures. The following measures will be implemented to avoid and minimize impacts to jurisdictional waters to less than significant levels.  During or prior to project design, a wetland
delineation of the project area shall be conducted to determine precise boundaries of jurisdictional wetlands and other waters. Impacts to any jurisdictional habitats shall be avoided to the extent practicable. If wetlands or other waters under state or federal jurisdiction occur in the construction areas and involve the placement of fill or dredged materials or other alteration, the necessary and appropriate permits and approvals from responsible resource agencies shall be secured. As appropriate for the type of permit to be considered, options that avoid, minimize, or mitigate potential impacts on jurisdictional wetlands shall be evaluated. Conditions of approval attached to the permits shall be followed.  Sensitive habitat areas including wetlands adjacent to, but outside of, the construction area shall be demarcated with orange construction fencing to exclude workers, vehicles, and equipment.  The locations of habitats to be avoided shall be
identified in the contract documents (plans and specifications) as “Sensitive Biological Resources – Do Not Disturb.”
 Jack-and-bore or other trenchless methods shall be
used as feasible to reduce the need for surface construction within identified sensitive habitats and exclusion zones, and construction activities and Applicant and Contractors (including a qualified biologist) project design and during project construction
implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division U.S. Army Corps or Regional Water Quality Control Board for jurisdictional waters the wetland delineation prior to issuance of Planning permit. Ensure construction measures are included on the project applicant’s grading and construction plans. Restoration plan prepared by a qualified biologist and approved by the City the wetland delineation once prior to Planning permit. Ensure construction measures are included on the project applicant’s site plans prior to issuance of grading or building permit. Restoration plan approved by the City prior to grading or building permit 734
C–36
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency vehicles shall be restricted to a specified right-of-way.  Temporarily impacted wetlands and other waters
shall be restored in place based on a restoration plan prepared by a qualified biologist and approved by the City.  Where possible, trenches shall be worked from only
one side to minimize impacts on adjacent habitat.
 Watering of exposed earth shall be conducted
consistent with construction BMPs to minimize dust production.  Trench lines shall be reseeded with native vegetation appropriate for the affected habitat type, and/or a double-trenching technique shall be used through sensitive habitats to help preserve the existing seedbank.  Any imported fill within wetlands shall be clean with no pathogens or weed seeds. When seed mixes are applied to wetlands, only specialized mixes with locally collected seed from coastal salt marsh plant species that occur in the habitat shall be utilized.

MM BIO-10.2: Jurisdictional Waters Compensatory
Mitigation. If impacts to jurisdictional wetlands or other waters cannot be avoided, compensatory mitigation shall be provided as follows (or as otherwise required by conditions of applicable resource agency permits) to reduce impacts to less than significant impacts.  Compensatory mitigation shall be provided via the
purchase of credits from a wetland mitigation bank; project-specific mitigation via the creation or Project Applicant and Contractors (including a qualified biologist) Prior to issuance of grading permit or building permit (Preparation HMMP and purchase of credits) Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division Review and approve HMMP developed by the qualified biologist restoration ecologist Review HMMP (Once) Until success criteria for the habitat and species are met (a minimum of 5 735
C–37
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency restoration of the same general type of wetlands/waters impacted; or some combination of the two approaches. Compensatory mitigation shall be provided at a minimum ratio of 2:1 (mitigation: impact) on an acreage basis if project-specific mitigation is performed or 1:1 if credits are purchased from a mitigation bank. Mitigation performed for loss of salt marsh harvest mouse and salt marsh wandering shrew habitat, as described in MM BIO-2.2, may be adequate compensation for impacts to jurisdictional waters if performed via purchase of credits in a wetland mitigation bank and/or creation of suitable wetlands as described in the following bullet point.  If project-specific mitigation is provided as
compensatory mitigation, a qualified biologist will prepare an HMMP describing the measures that will be taken to create, restore, or enhance appropriate habitats and to monitor mitigation success. The HMMP will include, at a minimum, the following:
 A summary of project impacts on jurisdictional
habitats and the proposed mitigation of these impacts;
 A description of the location and boundaries of
the mitigation site and a description of existing mitigation site conditions;  A description of measures to be undertaken, if
necessary, to create, restore, or enhance appropriate habitats;  Proposed management activities, such as
During construction and project operations (monitoring measures at the compensatory mitigation site) U.S. Army Corps or Regional Water Quality Control Board Review areas proposed to be preserved as compensatory mitigation for impacts to special-status plant species Ensure permanent protection and management of mitigation lands through an appropriate mechanism, such as a conservation easement or fee title purchase. years)
736
C–38
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency management of invasive plants, to maintain highquality habitat conditions;  A description of community monitoring
measures on the mitigation site, including specific, objective goals and objectives, performance indicators, success criteria, monitoring methods, data analysis, reporting requirements, and monitoring schedule. At a minimum, success criteria will include demonstration of at least 75 percent cover by native wetland plants within the mitigation area. Monitoring shall occur until these criteria are achieved but for no less than five years;  A description of the HMMP’s adaptive
component, including potential contingency measures for mitigation elements that do not meet performance criteria; and  A description of the funding mechanism to
ensure the long-term maintenance and monitoring of the mitigation lands.

The HMMP will be approved by the City and any agencies
involved in issuing permits for the specific project in question (e.g., USACE and RWQCB) prior to the initiation of impacts to jurisdictional wetlands or other waters.

Impact BIO-11: Construction of multi-use trail would impede wildlife movement along the upland/tidal marsh interface on the eastern edge of the Specific Plan area. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) Implementation of the above Mitigation Measure MM BIO-2.1 See above Mitigation Measures MM BIO-2.1, MM BIO-8.1 and MM BIO-8.2 737
C–39
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency (including restoration of ecotone vegetation on the marsh side of the multi-use trail) and Mitigation Measures MM BIO-8.1 and MM BIO-8.2 (to minimize lighting impacts) would mitigate the impacts of the multi-use trail on wildlife movement to less than significant levels.

GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Impact GEO-1: Future projects under the Specific Plan Update could directly or indirectly cause substantial adverse effects related to strong seismic ground shaking and seismic-related ground failure. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)MM GEO-1: All structures shall be designed using sound engineering judgment and the latest California Building Code (CBC) requirements as a minimum. Seismic design provisions of current building codes generally prescribe minimum lateral forces, applied statically to the structure, combined with the gravity forces of dead and live loads. The code-prescribed lateral forces are generally substantially smaller than the expected peak forces that would be associated with a major earthquake. Therefore, structures shall be able to do all of the following:
 Resist minor earthquakes without damage.  Resist moderate earthquakes without structural damage but with some nonstructural damage.
 Resist major earthquakes without collapse but with
some structural as well as nonstructural damage.

Project Applicant and Contractors
Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit
Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Building Division Review project design to confirm project is in compliance with the seismic design provisions in the CBC Once prior to issuance of a grading or building permit
738
C–40
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency Impact GEO-2: Future projects under the Specific Plan Update could directly or indirectly cause substantial adverse effects related to liquefaction. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)MM GEO-2: Foundations shall be designed to compensate for effects of liquefaction, differential settlement, and lateral spreading due to earthquakes. Foundations shall be designed by a qualified structural engineer using soil design parameters developed by qualified geotechnical consultants and verified by the City’s Building Services Division.

Project Applicant and Contractors (including qualified Geotechnical Consultants and Structural Engineers) Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit
Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Building Division Review project design and geotechnical/ structural engineering consultant reports to confirm foundations are in compliance with the soil design parameters developed by qualified geotechnical consultants Once prior to issuance of a grading or building permit
Impact GEO-3: Future development adjacent to the San Francisco Bay could result in a significant impact related to lateral spreading. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)MM GEO-3: Implement Mitigation Measure GEO-1 above. In addition, site development plans and foundations shall be designed to compensate for effects of lateral spreading due to earthquakes. Earthwork activities, including remedial grading, shall be performed using the recommendations provided by qualified geotechnical consultants, and foundations shall be Project Applicant and Contractors (including qualified
Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit
Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Review project design and geotechnical/ structural engineering Once prior to issuance of a grading or building permit
739
C–41
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency designed by a qualified structural engineers using soil design parameters developed by qualified geotechnical consultants and verified by the City’s Building Services Division.

Geotechnical Consultants and Structural Engineers)
Development Department, Building Division
consultant reports to confirm foundations are designed to compensate for effects of seismically induced lateral spreading Impact GEO-4: Future development on existing Bay Mud deposits and fills could result in significant vertical movement and differential settlement. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)MM GEO-4: Improvements on areas of soft Bay Mud and artificial fill must be designed under the guidance of suitably qualified geotechnical consultants to ensure that the underlying substrate is capable of withstanding the load. Existing fills may need to be removed and replaced with engineered fills.

Project Applicant and Contractors (including qualified Geotechnical Consultants) Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit
Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Building Division Review project design and reports prepared by geotechnical consultants to confirm improvements on areas with Bay Mud and artificial fill are capable of withstanding the load.

Once prior to issuance of a grading or building permit
Impact GEO-5: Future development on the existing expansive soils could result in resulting in heaving and cracking of building foundations. (Less than 740
C–42
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)MM GEO-5: Earthwork and foundations shall be designed to compensate for effects of expansive soils. Fill placement and foundation design criteria shall be developed by qualified geotechnical consultants and verified by the City’s Building Services Division.

Project Applicant and Contractors (including qualified Geotechnical Consultants) Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit
Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Building Division Review project design and reports prepared by geotechnical consultant to confirm earthwork and foundations are design to compensate for the effects of expansive soils.

Once prior to issuance of a grading building permit
Impact GEO-6: Future projects could encounter paleontological resources during construction, resulting in the destruction of these resources. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)MM GEO-6: If paleontological resources are encountered during grading or excavation, all construction activities within 50 feet shall stop and the City shall be notified. A qualified paleontologist shall inspect the findings within 24 hours of discovery. 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, project applicants shall pay in-lieu fees to mitigate significant effects. Excavation as Project Applicant and Contractors (including a qualified Paleontologist) During construction
Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division Approve mitigation measures from paleontologist retained by project applicant if paleontological resources are encountered during grading or excavation When resources are encountered
741
C–43
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency mitigation shall be limited to those parts of resources 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. Therefore, when considering these possible mitigations, the City shall have a preference for preservation in place.

Determine appropriate mitigation and/or data recovery if necessary

NOISE AND VIBRATION
Impact NOI-1: Future projects within 500 feet of residential land uses and 200 feet of commercial land uses could result in significant temporary noise impacts to these receptors. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) MM NOI-1.1: Prior to the issuance of future developments’ grading permits, a typical construction noise logistics plan would include, but not be limited to, the following measures to reduce construction noise levels as low as practical:
 Limit construction activity to weekdays between 7:00
a.m. and 7:00 p.m. and Saturdays and holidays between 9:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., with no construction on Sundays;  Limit combined construction noise levels (levels from all construction equipment used per phase) to an hourly average of 80 dBA Leq for residential receptors Project Applicant and Contractors
Prepare Noise Logistics Plan prior to issuance of grading and/or demolition permits Implement measures during construction Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division and Public Works Department Review and verify construction noise logistics plan includes required measures to reduce construction noise logistics plan to less than Prior to grading and building permit issuance, and as needed during construction 742
C–44
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency and to an hourly average of 90 dBA Leq for commercial receptors;  Utilize "quiet" models of air compressors and other
stationary noise sources where such technology exists;
 Equip all internal combustion engine-driven
equipment with mufflers, which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment;  Locate all stationary noise-generating equipment,
such as air compressors and portable power generators, as far away as possible from adjacent land uses;  Locate staging areas and construction material areas
as far away as possible from adjacent land uses;
 Prohibit all unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines;
 If impact pile driving is proposed, multiple-pile drivers shall be considered to expedite construction. Although noise levels generated by multiple pile drivers would be higher than the noise generated by a single pile driver, the total duration of pile driving activities would be reduced;  If impact pile driving is proposed, temporary noise
control blanket barriers shall shroud pile drivers or be erected in a manner to shield the adjacent land uses. significant levels. Ensure all measures are printed on the project construction plans prior to issuance of permits. 743
C–45
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency Such noise control blanket barriers can be rented and quickly erected;  If impact pile driving is proposed, foundation pile
holes shall be pre-drilled to minimize the number of impacts required to seat the pile. Pre-drilling foundation pile holes is a standard construction noise control technique. Pre-drilling reduces the number of blows required to seat the pile. Notify all adjacent land uses of the construction schedule in writing;  Designate a "disturbance coordinator" who would be
responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator will determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and will require that reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem are implemented.  Conspicuously post a telephone number for the
disturbance coordinator at the construction site and include it in the notice sent to neighbors regarding the construction.

Impact NOI-2: Traffic noise levels would result in an increase of three dBA CNEL or more at two roadway segments on Bay Road when 2040 cumulative plus project scenarios are compared to existing conditions and would increase noise levels by one dBA CNEL over cumulative no project conditions, resulting in a significant increase in permanent noise levels. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated) MM NOI-2.1: Future development projects under the Specific Plan Update shall pay a fair share contribution toward the City's installation of quieter pavement types, at Bay Road Project applicant and contractors and
Fair share contribution prior to issuance of
Oversight of implementation by the City’s
City to collect fair share contribution
Collect fair share contribution from project
744
C–46
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency segments from University Avenue to Clark Avenue and Clark Avenue to Pulgas Avenue, such as Open-Grade Rubberized Asphaltic Concrete or a New Rubberized Asphalt Concrete which would reduce noise levels by five (5) dBA or more from future conditions (assuming the affected segments are repaved every 10 years). Future development projects that contribute traffic to the affected segments of Bay Road shall pay a one-time fair share contribution toward the repaving of the two Bay Road segments.

City building permit.

City to install quieter pavement prior to approving 60% of the development allowed under the Plan Update Public Works Department in coordination with the Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division from project applicant City to install quieter pavement applicant once prior to building permit City to track implementation of the Plan Update to ensure pavement installed prior to roadway noise impact Impact NOI-3: Future development’s operational mechanical equipment could result in noise levels that exceed exterior noise levels at noise-sensitive receptors identified in Section 8.52.030 in the City’s Municipal Code. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)MM NOI-3.1: Future development projects within the Specific Plan area shall retain a qualified acoustical consultant to review mechanical equipment systems during final design of their proposed project consistent with standard City practice. The qualified acoustical consultant shall review selected equipment and determine specific noise reduction measures necessary to reduce noise to comply with the City’s noise level requirements set forth in Section 8.52.320 of the City’s Municipal Code. Noise reduction measures could include, but are not limited to, selection of equipment that emits low noise levels and/or installation of noise barriers, such as enclosures and parapet walls, to block the line-of-sight between the noise source and the nearest receptors. Additionally, enclosures and interior wall treatments shall be considered to reduce noise Project Applicant and Contractors (including a qualified acoustical consultant) Prior to issuance of a building permit
Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division and Building Division.

Review mechanical equipment systems noise reduction measures prepared by qualified acoustical consultant Once prior to the issuance of a building permit
745
C–47
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency exposure within the on-site units. Alternate measures may include locating equipment in less noise-sensitive areas, where feasible. Impact NOI-4: Future construction activities could result in groundborne vibration levels exceeding 0.3 in/sec PPV limit at nonhistorical buildings, which would result in a significant vibration impact. (Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated)MM NOI-4.1: To address potential impacts related to vibration, the project will implement the following vibration controls in addition to the measures included in Policy 7.11 of the City’s General Plan:
 Comply with the construction noise ordinance to limit hours of exposure. The City’s Municipal Code allows construction activities between the hours 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays and between 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Construction activity is not permitted on Sundays or national holidays.  Prohibit the use of heavy vibration-generating
construction equipment within 25 feet of residences. Use a smaller vibratory roller, such as the Caterpillar model CP433E vibratory compactor, when compacting materials within 25 feet of residences adjoining the site.  Avoid dropping heavy equipment within 25 feet of
residences. Use alternative methods for breaking up existing pavement, such as a pavement grinder, instead of dropping heavy objects within 25 feet of residences adjoining the site.

Project Applicant and Contractors
Prepare Construction Vibration Monitoring Plan prior to issuance of grading, building and/or demolition permits Implement measures during construction, including vibration monitoring and construction contingency plan Conduct a postconstruction survey Oversight of implementation by the City’s Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division and Building Division.

Review and verify construction vibration noise controls would reduce impacts to less than significant Ensure all measures will be printed on the project plans prior to issuance of grading, building, and/or demolition permits. Review and approve Once at permit approval, and as needed during construction 746
C–48
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency  The contractor shall alert heavy equipment operators
to the close proximity of the adjacent structures so they can exercise extra care.  For projects requiring impact or vibratory pile driving, a Construction Vibration Monitoring, Treatment, and Reporting Plan shall be implemented to document conditions prior to, during, and after vibrationgenerating construction activities. All plan tasks shall be undertaken under the direction of a licensed Professional Structural Engineer in the State of California and be in accordance with industryaccepted standard methods. The construction vibration monitoring plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following measures:
 Document conditions at all structures located
within 90 feet of pile driving activities and at historic structures located within 275 feet of pile driving activities prior to, during, and after vibration-generating construction activities. All plan tasks shall be undertaken under the direction of a licensed Professional Structural Engineer in the State of California and be in accordance with industry-accepted standard methods. Specifically:
 Vibration limits shall be applied to vibrationsensitive structures located within 90 feet of any high impact construction activities, such as pile driving, and 275 feet of historic buildings.  Performance of a photo survey, elevation
survey, and crack monitoring survey for each
vibration monitoring and construction contingency plan Review postconstruction survey results 747
C–49
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency structure of normal construction within 90 feet of any high impact construction activities and each historic structure within 275 feet of pile driving activities. Surveys shall be performed prior to any construction activity, in regular intervals during construction, and after project completion, and shall include internal and external crack monitoring in structures, settlement, and distress, and shall document the condition of foundations, walls and other structural elements in the interior and exterior of said structures.  Develop a vibration monitoring and
construction contingency plan to identify structures where monitoring would be conducted, set up a vibration monitoring schedule, define structure-specific vibration limits, and address the need to conduct photo, elevation, and crack surveys to document before and after construction conditions. Construction contingencies shall be identified for when vibration levels approached the limits.  At a minimum, vibration monitoring shall be
conducted during all pile driving activities.
 If vibration levels approach limits, suspend
construction and implement contingency measures to either lower vibration levels or secure the affected structures.  Designate a person responsible for registering
and investigating claims of excessive vibration.
748
C–50
a. Mitigation Measures Implemented By Implementation Timing Monitored By Monitoring Action Monitoring Frequency The contact information of such person shall be clearly posted on the construction site.

Conduct a post-construction survey on structures where either monitoring has indicated high vibration levels or complaints of damage has been made. Make appropriate repairs or compensation where damage has occurred as a result of construction activities.

Source: City of East Palo Alto. Ravenswood/Four Corners Specific Plan Update SEIR. November 2024. 749
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
ATTACHMENT – 2 CEQA Document Links

Project Website for All Documents:
https://www.cityofepa.org/planning/page/rbd-specific-plan-update Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (including response to comments):
 https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/16201/ rbd_specific_plan_update_final_seir_11.15.24.pdf
November 26, 2024 Errata for Final SEIR
 https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/16201/ rbd_fseir_errata_11.26.pdf
November 21, 2024 Errata for Final SEIR
 https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/16201/ rbd_fseir_errata_11.21.2024.pdf
Final SEIR Appendices:
 Appendix A (Draft SEIR Comments):
https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/16201/ appendix_a_rbd_seir_public_comment_ltrs_july-sept._2024.pdf  Appendix B (Supporting Documentation):
https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/16201/ appendix_b_rbd_seir_supporting_documentation_oct._2024.pdf Draft EIR:
 https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/16201/ draft_rbd_specific_plan_update_seir_7.24.24_update_web-ready.pdf Draft EIR Appendices
 https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/16201/ appendix_a_nop_and_comment_letters_2022.pdf
 https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/16201/ appendix_b_aq-ghg_assessment_rbd_july_2024.pdf
 https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/16201/ appendix_c_biological_report_rbd_march_2024.pdf
 https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/16201/ appendix_d_screening_level_esa_rbd_march_2023.pdf
 https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/16201/ appendix_e_noise_rbd_may_2023.pdf
 https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/16201/ appendix_f_transportation_analysis_rbd_mar_2023.pdf
750
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
ATTACHMENT – 2 CEQA Document Links

 https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/16201/ appendix_g_utility_impact_study_rbd_june_2024.pdf
 https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/16201/ appendix_h_wsa_rbd_february_2024.pdf
751
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
ATTACHMENT – 3 Specific Plan Ordinance

1 of 1
DRAFT

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO REPEALING THE RAVENSWOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT/4 CORNERS SPECIFIC PLAN (2013) AND ADOPTING AN UPDATED SPECIFIC PLAN
WHEREAS, the City has prepared an update to the Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners Specific Plan (“Specific Plan”) to revise land use policies, development standards, the land use map, and other amendments to allow additional development capacity in the Specific Plan area, and related amendments to Title 18, Development Code, of the City of East Palo Alto Municipal Code (“Development Code”) for consistency with the Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City prepared a Draft Specific Plan update and Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (DSEIR) pursuant to CEQA; and WHEREAS, the City of East Palo Alto (“City”) certified a Final Environmental Impact Report and adopted the City of East Palo Horizon 2035 General Plan (“General Plan”) on October 4, 2016;
WHEREAS, on March 23, 2021, preliminary findings around key constraints and existing conditions in the Specific Plan area were presented to the City Council; and WHEREAS, on May 27, 2021, a virtual public workshop was held to describe the Specific Plan update; and
WHEREAS, on June 8, 2021, details related to mobility challenges and potential solutions in the Specific Plan area were presented to the City Council; and WHEREAS, on June 14, 2021, status updates on the Specific Plan were presented to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, on September 22, 2021, a public workshop was held describing the potential growth scenarios, potential impacts and benefits of each scenario for the Specific Plan update; and
WHEREAS, on September 27, 2021, an additional public workshop was held describing the potential growth scenarios, potential impacts and benefits of each scenario for the Specific Plan update; and
WHEREAS, on September 28, 2021, a Joint Session of the City Council and Planning Commission, was held to describe the trade-offs of the different amounts of office/research and development in the Specific Plan area; and 752
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
ATTACHMENT – 3 Specific Plan Ordinance

1 of 1
WHEREAS, on November 18, 2021, the City Council rendered a decision to have Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 studied as maximum growth scenarios under the Specific Plan update Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) CEQA process (Scenario 1 which includes 2.8 million square-feet of office/research and development and Scenario 2 which includes 3.35 million square-feet of office/research and development); and
WHEREAS, on February 1, 2022, the City Council decided on the locations and total number of housing units to study under CEQA in the Specific Plan area; and WHEREAS, on February 15, 2022, February 17, 2022, and February 23, 2022, informal sessions were held to allow community members to ask questions and provide feedback for the Specific Plan update; and
WHEREAS, on March 24 ,2022, a virtual public workshop was held where residents and stakeholders provided feedback and shared their preferences on community benefits; and
WHEREAS, on April 15, 2022, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Specific Plan update was released; and
WHEREAS, on April 20, 2022, April 23, 2022, and April 27, 2022, pop-up workshops were held about the Specific Plan update; and WHEREAS, on April 5, 2022, a community benefits survey was released regarding priorities for community benefits related to the Specific Plan area; and WHEREAS, on May 9, 2022, a Public Scoping meeting was held during a regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting; and
WHEREAS, on May 17, 2022, the summary of results of the community benefits survey, a discussion of priorities and policy mechanisms were discussed at a City Council meeting; and
WHEREAS, on April 25, 2023, updates on key issues were presented at a City Council meeting; and
WHEREAS, on July 25, 2023, a presentation on the proposed framework for implementing the citywide Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Ordinance, formation of a Transportation Management Association (TMA), and Parking policies for the Specific Plan update was presented at a City Council meeting; and WHEREAS, on April 5, 2024, the Draft Specific Plan update was released for public comment; and
753
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
ATTACHMENT – 3 Specific Plan Ordinance

1 of 1
WHEREAS, on April 24, 2024, a study session was held focused on an overview of the updated Plan and describe key changes since the Plan was last reviewed by Council in 2023, including the revised Community Benefits Framework at a City Council meeting; and
WHEREAS, on April 25, 2024, a Study Session on the release of the first eleven draft chapters of the Specific Plan update was presented to the City Council requesting feedback and initial comments at this meeting; and
WHEREAS, on July 25, 2024, a Joint Session of the City Council and Planning Commission, was held providing an overview of the Public Draft SEIR and included a request for direction on the preferred maximum development scenario and a continued discussion of the draft Community Benefits Framework; and WHEREAS, on July 26, 2024, the Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SCH2022040352) were released for public comment; and WHEREAS, on September 24, 2024, the City Council held a study session where direction was given to select Scenario 2 as the preferred maximum development scenario, to delete the Loop Road from the Specific Plan, and additional input was given on the draft Community Benefits Framework; and
WHEREAS, the City Released a Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (EIR), and associated zoning and General Plan Amendments on November 18, 2024; and
WHEREAS, the Final Specific Plan consists of the Draft Specific Plan which is incorporated by reference into the Final Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, the entire Specific Plan update process has included thirteen public meetings; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of East Palo Alto reviewed, considered, and evaluated all the testimony and evidence submitted on this matter; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determined that it is in the best interest of the City to adopt and implement the Specific Plan, Zoning Amendments and General Plan Amendment; and
WHEREAS, at a public hearing on November 18, 2024, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the Ravenswood/4 Corners Specific Plan update; and
WHEREAS, the Specific Plan update has complied with the provisions of Government Code Section 65453; and
754
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
ATTACHMENT – 3 Specific Plan Ordinance

1 of 1
WHEREAS, a Final Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for the Specific Plan update and associated General Plan and Development Code amendments in accordance with Section 15132 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, and the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the FEIR and public comments received during the public review period; and WHEREAS, General Plan amendments pertain to text revisions related to various chapters of the General Plan, including policies pertaining to vision and strategies, land use, economic development, mobility, infrastructure and public facilities, safety and noise, and implementation, and pertain to map amendments to reference the land use map in the Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing, found that the RBD Specific Plan Update met the required findings, and approved the proposed Specific Plan on December 3, 2024.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. INCORPORATION OF RECITALS AND WAIVE FIRST READING The City Council finds that the above Recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference and waives the first reading of an ordinance to adopt the Ravenswood Business District/4Corners Specific Plan.

SECTION 2. LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS
The City Council hereby finds that the Ravenswood Business District/Four Corners Specific Plan Update is in compliance with Government Code Sections 65450 et seq, and is consistent with the goals and policies of the City of East Palo Alto Vista 2035 General Plan.

SECTION 3. REPEAL AND REPLACEMENT OF RAVENSWOOD BUSINESS

DISTRICT/FOUR CORNERS SPECIFIC PLAN
The Ravenswood Business District/Four Corners Specific Plan is hereby repealed and replaced to read as shown in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

SECTION 4. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.

The environmental effects of the RBD Specific Plan Update, associated General Plan amendment and its associated development code amendments were analyzed in the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH# 2022040352) and 755
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
ATTACHMENT – 3 Specific Plan Ordinance

1 of 1
Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program, which were certified and approved by the City on December 3, 2024.

SECTION 5. SEVERABILITY.

If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed and adopted this Ordinance, and each and all provisions hereof, irrespective of the fact that one or more provisions may be declared invalid.

SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE.

This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force thirty (30) days after the date of its adoption.

SECTION 7. PUBLICATION.

The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause publication of this Ordinance as required by Government Code Section 36933.

INTRODUCED at a regular City Council meeting held December 3, 2024, and PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular City Council meeting held on , 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Signed:

_____________________
Antonio D. Lopez, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________ ______________________
James Colin, City Clerk John D. Lê, City Attorney
756
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
ATTACHMENT – 3 Specific Plan Ordinance

1 of 1

EXHIBIT-A
RBD Specific Plan
757
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
ATTACHMENT – 4 RBD Specific Plan Links
Link to tracked changes in Final Draft Specific Plan (November 26, 2024):
 https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/16201/ rbdspu_finalplan_tracked.pdf
Project Website for All Documents (including 11/18/24 Planning Commission tracked changes draft specific plan and original draft specific plan):
 https://www.cityofepa.org/planning/page/rbd-specific-plan-update 758
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
ATTACHMENT – 5 Development Code Amendment Ordinance
DRAFT

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO REPEALING THE EXISTING
CHAPTER 18.18 OF THE EAST PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE AND
ENACTING A NEW CHAPTER 18.18 TO IDENTIFY SPECIFIC PLANS

ADOPTED BY THE CITY

WHEREAS, the City has prepared an update to the Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners Specific Plan (“Specific Plan”) to revise land use policies, related figures and tables, development standards, design guidelines, implementation measures, and other amendments for the purpose of allowing additional development capacity in the Specific Plan area, achieving priority community benefits, and defining necessary public facility and infrastructure improvements;
WHEREAS, a Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (“FSEIR”) has been prepared for the Specific Plan and associated General Plan and Development Code amendments in accordance with Section 15132 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, and the City Council has reviewed the FEIR and public comments received during the public review period;
WHEREAS, Section 18.114 of the City of East Palo Alto Development Code allows for amendments to the Development Code and provides procedures for processing such amendments;

WHEREAS, Section 18.114.060 of the City of East Palo Alto Development Code sets forth findings for Development Code amendments;
WHEREAS, the purpose of Section 18.18 of the City of East Palo Alto Development Code is to identify the specific plans adopted by the City and the specific plans identified are detailed in the Council-adopted specific plan for the designated area.

WHEREAS, in order to maintain the uniqueness, accuracy, character, and integrity of each specific plan, the contents of each Council-adopted specific plan shall govern the purpose, allowable land uses, specific development standards, architectural guidelines, and all other regulatory requirements for each specific plan.

WHEREAS, Section 18.18 of the City of East Palo Alto Development Code serves as a reference to each Council-adopted specific plan; the regulations that govern land use in the specific plan area(s) are contained in the relevant specific plan, incorporated for enforcement purposes by this reference, and may be further elaborated in the 759
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
ATTACHMENT – 5 Development Code Amendment Ordinance
Development Code as necessary. For matters not detailed in the relevant specific plan or this Code, the general provisions of the Development Code apply.

WHEREAS, on November 18, 2024, the Planning Commission conducted a duly and properly noticed public hearing, reviewed and considered the FSEIR, and recommended that the City Council adopt the amendments to the General Plan, the update to the Specific Plan, and related amendments to Title 18, Development Code, of the East Palo Alto Municipal Code; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission found that the Development Code amendment met the required findings, and recommended the City Council adopt the amendment; and

WHEREAS, the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing, found that the Development Code amendment met the required findings, and approved the proposed amendment on December 3, 2024.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Recitals
The City Council has duly considered the full record before it, which may include but is not limited to such things as the City staff report, Planning Commission recommendation, testimony by staff and the public, and other materials and evidence submitted or provided to the City Council. Furthermore, the recitals set forth above are found to be true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference.

SECTION 2. Findings for Development Code Amendment
In accordance with East Palo Alto Municipal Code Section Chapter 18.114.060(B) – Findings for Development Code Amendments, the City Council makes the following findings in support of Development Code Amendment No. ZC 24-002.

1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan.

The proposed amendment includes revisions to Chapter 18.18 to be consistent with the Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners Specific Plan Update. In addition, the proposed amendment is consistent with the various chapters of the City of East Palo Alto Vista 2035 General Plan, which is also being amended to be consistent with the Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners Specific Plan Update. 760
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
ATTACHMENT – 5 Development Code Amendment Ordinance
Accordingly the proposed amendment will be consistent with the General Plan as well.

2. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the City.

The proposed Development Code amendment does not introduce changes that will create conditions that will be potentially detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City. The Development Code, which is consistent with the Specific Plan and General Plan, implements development standards to enhance the public health, safety and welfare of the City, including policies and implementation actions that address development capacity, architectural design quality, land use compatibility, natural habitat preservation, community benefits, employment and housing opportunities, and public facility/infrastructure improvements to address existing deficiencies and future needs. Additionally, the FSEIR along with the accompanying Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan identify measures to reduce public health and safety impacts, including but not limited to air quality, transportation, noise, and geotechnical hazards.

3. Additional Finding for Development Code Amendments. The proposed amendment is internally consistent with other applicable provisions of the Development Code.

The proposed Development Code Amendment is internally consistent with other applicable provisions. The proposed changes are intended to implement and is consistent with the Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners and all other provisions will remain the unchanged.

SECTION 3. CHAPTER 18.18 Specific Plans

The City Council hereby amends Chapter 18.18 of the East Palo Alto Municipal Code by repealing the existing chapter in its entirety and adding a new Chapter 18.18 to read as follows.

Chapter 18.18 – SPECIFIC PLANS
Sections:
761
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
ATTACHMENT – 5 Development Code Amendment Ordinance

18.18.010 Purpose and Intent
A. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to identify the specific plans adopted by the City.

B. Applicability.

1. The specific plans identified are detailed in the Council-adopted specific plan for the designated area(s).

2. In order to maintain the uniqueness, accuracy, character, and integrity of each specific plan, the contents of each Council-adopted specific plan shall govern the purpose, allowable land uses, specific development standards, architectural guidelines, and all other regulatory requirements for each specific plan.

3. This chapter serves as a reference to each Council-adopted specific plan; the regulations that govern land use in the specific plan area(s) are contained in the relevant specific plan, incorporated for enforcement purposes by this reference, and may be further elaborated in the Development Code as necessary. For matters not detailed in the relevant specific plan or this Code, the general provisions of the Development Code apply.

18.18.020 Ravenswood Specific Plan
A. Ravenswood Specific Plan Overlay District. The RBDSP Overlay District, as shown on the official City of East Palo Alto zoning plan, zoning district map on file in the office of the city clerk and incorporated by reference, is established to implement the Ravenswood Specific Plan (RBDSP). The RBDSP is a comprehensive, long term planning document for the Ravenswood area, and includes architectural and design guidelines, site development standards, public facility improvement plans, and an environmental mitigation monitoring program to be implemented through zoning and subdivision regulations, development standards, and public and private improvements. The Council makes the following findings:

1. Implementation of the RBDSP will diversify and strengthen the economic opportunities and fiscal health of the city.

2. Implementation of the RBDSP will contribute positively to the city's regional prominence and community character.

3. Implementation of the RBDSP is in accordance with the city's goal to promote smart growth and sustainable development.

B. Ravenswood Specific Plan Overlay Subdistricts. The Ravenswood Specific Plan Overlay District is divided into subdistricts to further refine development requirements within the RBDSP area. These subdistricts are reflected on Figure 6-1 of the RBDSP:
762
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
ATTACHMENT – 5 Development Code Amendment Ordinance

1. 4 Corners Gateway (4C), 4 Corners Gateway. Intended to support an enlivened, thriving “downtown” for East Palo Alto focused on and around the intersection of University Avenue and Bay Road. Accommodates multi-story mixed-use buildings that have retail stores or community facilities on the ground floor, with housing and/or offices and research and development facilities above.

2. Bay Road Central (BRC), intended to make Bay Road a lively, inviting place that creates a strong connection between 4 Corners and Cooley Landing.

Accommodates multi-story mixed-use buildings that have individual residential entries, retail stores, or storefront-type offices on the ground floor, with housing (or offices to a lesser extent) on upper floors.

3. Ravenswood—Employment Center (REC), intended to support the development of a variety of job-creating uses, including high-quality research and development (R&D) facilities and associated offices. Also accommodates businesses that fabricate and produce goods, distribute merchandise, or repair equipment, provided that they do not negatively affect surrounding uses or properties.

4. Industrial Transition (IT), accommodates low-intensity light industrial, manufacturing, and repair businesses that do not attract large amounts of traffic or adversely affect nearby homes. Provides spaces for local businesses. Serves as a transition between single-family homes and more intense employment areas.

5. Waterfront Office (WO), intended to create a higher-intensity, urban office district within the Plan Area. Accommodates professional offices, research & development facilities, limited light industrial uses, and supporting retail or similar uses.

6. Urban Residential (UR), intended to provide for the development of a variety of housing types at moderate densities. Accommodates attached single family (such as townhomes, duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes) and multi-family apartments or condominiums.

7. Parks and Recreation (PR). Intended to be placed on those parcels dedicated to conservation of existing open space and development of traditional parks, greenways, recreational/community facilities, and other “public” spaces within the Plan Area.

C. Residential Overlay Zones. The Specific Plan also provides for the following Residential Overlay zones which are regulated according to their respective provisions in the City’s Development Code (see Figure 6-1: Land Use Map for where overlays apply):
763
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
ATTACHMENT – 5 Development Code Amendment Ordinance

1. R-MD-1: 2.5 stories, 15 du/acre base; or more with State Density Bonus for inclusionary housing

2. R-MD-2: 3 stories, 22 du/acre; or more with State Density Bonus for inclusionary housing

3. R-HD-5: 5 stories, 43 du/acre; or more with State Density Bonus for inclusionary housing
CD. Continuation and Expiration of Existing Use Permits. Existing Interim Use Permits, other than for automobile dismantlers, shall automatically expire on October 16, 2022. If the business or nonprofit is in operation at its existing location on July 1, 2022, the owner/operator shall apply for a one year Special Use Permit, which may be granted at the discretion of the Director. Additional yearly extensions may be applied for.

Nothing in this subsection precludes the filing of an Administrative Use Permit or Conditional Use Permit where the use is listed in Table 6-1 of the Ravenswood Specific Plan; or from requesting approval as a New Interim Use.

DE. Determination of New Interim Use.

1. Uses not specifically listed in Table 6-1 of the RBDSP may be deemed a New Interim Use by the Commission subject to the following:
a. The use is proposed to be located within an existing building constructed prior to adoption of the RBDSP;
b. The use does not require the construction of a new building or covered structure or expansion of an existing building or covered structure; c. The Commission has received a written request and has subsequently deemed the use an appropriate interim use based on all the following findings:
(1) The use will not be detrimental to the long-term success of the implementation of the RBDSP; and
(2) The use will provide employment, services or other public benefits to the City and its residents; and
(3) The use does not require the construction or expansion of a building or covered structure; and
(4) The use, by its nature, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare and/or contradictory to the goals and objectives of the General Plan and RBDSP.

2. A New Interim Use shall not be established or commenced without first obtaining a Special Use Permit (SUP). The initial term of the SUP shall be three (3) years and no time extension shall exceed a total of two (2) years. 764
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
ATTACHMENT – 5 Development Code Amendment Ordinance
EF. Submission For New Interim Use Determination.

1. Any applicant requesting consideration by the Commission for a New Interim Use shall file a written request to the Commission on a form provided by the Department.

2. The applicant shall, in addition to the application form, submit the following:
a. A detailed description of the proposed use;
b. A description of any existing uses and structures on the site and the extent to which the same will be altered, improved or eliminated; c. The period of time being requested for the interim use; d. Justification as to how the proposed use is consistent with the required findings;
e. Other information as may be deemed necessary by the Director.

3. The application shall be accompanied by the payment of a processing fee, in such amount as established from time to time by resolution of the Council.

765
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
ATTACHMENT – 5 Development Code Amendment Ordinance
SECTION 4. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.

The environmental effects of the RBD Specific Plan Update, associated General Plan amendment and its associated development code amendments were analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH# 2022040352) and Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program, which were certified and approved by the City on December 3, 2024.

SECTION 5. SEVERABILITY.

SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE.

This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force thirty (30) days after the date of its adoption.

SECTION 7. PUBLICATION.

The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause publication of this Ordinance as required by Government Code Section 36933.

INTRODUCED at a regular City Council meeting held December 3, 2024, and PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular City Council meeting held on , 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

SIGNED:
766
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
ATTACHMENT – 5 Development Code Amendment Ordinance
_____________________
Antonio D. Lopez, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________ ______________________
James Colin, City Clerk John D. Lê, City Attorney
767
Attachment 6 – General Plan
Amendment Resolution
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
RESOLUTION NO. ______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO AMENDING THE EAST PALO ALTO VISTA 2035 GENERAL PLAN FOR

CONSISTENCY WITH THE UPDATE OF THE RAVENSWOOD BUSINESS
DISTRICT/4 CORNERS SPECIFIC PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of East Palo Alto (“City”) certified a Final Environmental Impact Report and adopted the City of East Palo Horizon 2035 General Plan (“General Plan”) on October 4, 2016;
WHEREAS, the City has prepared an update to the Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners Specific Plan (“Specific Plan”) to revise land use policies, related figures and tables, development standards, design guidelines, implementation measures, and other amendments for the purpose of allowing additional development capacity in the Specific Plan area, achieving priority community benefits, and defining necessary public facility and infrastructure improvements;
WHEREAS, a new land use designation entitled “Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners Specific Plan (RBD)” is proposed in the General Plan that encompasses the defined boundary of the Specific Plan, and the Specific Plan contains policies, development standards, design guidelines, and other measures to supplement and implement the General Plan;
WHEREAS, for consistency with the Specific Plan, related General Plan amendments pertain to policies, including supporting maps and tables, that address vision and strategies, land use, economic development, transportation, infrastructure, services, public facilities, safety, noise, and implementation as shown in hereto attached Exhibit A;
WHEREAS, a Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (“FSEIR”) has been prepared for the Specific Plan and associated General Plan and Development Code amendments in accordance with Section 15132 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, and the City Council has reviewed the FEIR and public comments received during the public review period;
WHEREAS, on November 18, 2024, the Planning Commission conducted a duly and properly noticed public hearing, reviewed and considered the FSEIR, and recommended that the City Council adopt the amendments the General Plan, the update 768
to the Specific Plan, and related amendments to Title 18, Development Code, of the East Palo Alto Municipal Code; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of East Palo Alto hereby finds, determines, and resolves as follows:

SECTION 2. CEQA Finding
The City Council finds that the environmental effects of the General Plan Amendment for consistency with the Specific Plan were analyzed for the project the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SCH#2022040352) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan, which were certified and approved by the City on December 3, 2024.

SECTION 3. Findings for General Plan Amendment
In accordance with East Palo Alto Municipal Code Section Chapter 18.114.060(A) – Findings for General Plan Amendments, the City Council makes the following findings in support of General Plan Amendment No. GP 24-001.

1. The proposed amendment is internally consistent with portions of the General Plan which are not being amended.

The proposed General Plan amendments include revisions to various chapters of the General Plan and are internally consistent between the chapters as well as the required General Plan elements as required by state law. Additionally, while the Specific Plan is a separate plan and serves as an implementation tool for the General Plan, the proposed General Plan amendments are consistent with the proposed update to the Specific Plan.

2. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City.

The proposed General Plan amendments do not introduce policy or other changes that will create conditions that will be potentially detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City. The Specific Plan implements the General Plan and contains policies to enhance the public health, safety and welfare of the City, including policies and implementation actions that address 769
development capacity, architectural design quality, land use compatibility, natural habitat preservation, community benefits, employment and housing opportunities, and public facility/infrastructure improvements to address existing deficiencies and future needs. Additionally, the FSEIR along with the accompanying Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan identify measures to reduce public health and safety impacts, including but not limited to air quality, transportation, noise, and geotechnical hazards.

3. 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.

The proposed policies and development standards in the Specific Plan apply to the area to be designated in the General Plan as the “Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners (RBD).” Specific Plan policies were formulated with consideration of the amount, topography, and characteristics of the developable site area in the RBD. New streets and improvements to existing streets are identified to ensure that the transportation system within and surrounding the RBD will be sufficient to accommodate the potential development capacity and will not adversely impact surrounding properties, land uses, and residents. The Specific Plan includes mobility policies with street cross-sections and design standards to guide future public and private roadway improvements. Utilities policies in the Specific Plan identify necessary water, storm drainage, and sanitary sewer system improvements to address existing deficiencies and future development needs, and define the obligation of future developers to contribute a proportional fair-share amount to fund these improvements. The Specific Plan includes a community benefits program to allow for higher density development through developers offering desired amenities such as parks, trails, public facilities, and/or community programs and services.

SECTION 4. City Council Action
The City Council of City of East Palo Alto hereby approves General Plan Amendment GP 24-001 amending the General Plan as described hereto in Exhibit A, incorporated by this reference, for compatibility and consistency with the update of the Specific Plan.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of East Palo Alto on this 3rd day of December 2024, by the following vote:
770
AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

SIGNED:

Antonio López, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

James Colin
City Clerk
John D. Lê
City Attorney
771

EXHIBIT A
General Plan Amendment
The following changes shall be made to the General Plan to reflect the updated Ravenswood Business District / 4 Corners Specific Plan. The changes are identified in strikethrough (deleted text) and underline (new text). Changes to figures can be found at the end of the document.

Universal Change through the General Plan
All references in the East Palo Alto Vista 2035 General Plan for the “Ravenswood TOD Specific Plan,” the “RBD Specific Plan,” the “Ravenswood/4 Corners TOD Specific Plan” or any similar reference to the Specific Plan are changed to “Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners Specific Plan.” Chapter 1: Vision and Strategies
Implement the following changes to Major Strategy #1 on page 1-4, as follows:

Implement the Ravenswood Business District /4 Corners Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Specific Plan. The largest potential for new development, increased parklands/open space, enhanced economic activity, and an improved jobs-housing balance is implementing the vision in the Ravenswood TOD Business District/4 Corners Specific Plan. To do so, the City should enhance engage in publicprivate partnerships, seek funding for public infrastructure improvements, explore district financing mechanisms, market the area to technology a variety of companies, secure long-term sources of water, facilitate flood control projects, and pursue catalytic development projects that attract additional development. The improvements must also be done in a way that is sensitive to the existing residents to ensure that the changes not only bring in increased tax revenue but also advance the economic conditions of East Palo Alto residents.

Chapter 4: Land Use
Add a new land use designation for the Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners Specific Plan on page 4-10, as follows:

Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners Specific Plan (RBD) Description: This designation is intended to implement the adopted Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners Specific Plan. The vision for the area is to transform the former industrial district into a vibrant mixed use and employment area with a diversity of residential, office, research and development, light industrial and open space uses.

Allowed Uses: See Specific Plan
Density/Intensity: See Specific Plan
772
Delete the General Industrial (I-G) land use designation on page 4-10 and the Industrial Buffer (I-B) land use designation on page 4-11, as follows:

General Industrial (I-G)
Description: This designation provides for industrial or manufacturing activities that may occur inside or outside of an enclosed building. Large-scale warehouse, distribution or logistics facilities are also allowed in this designation. Industrial activities are allowed in the Ravenswood Business District Specific Plan area.

Allowed Land Uses: Industrial (manufacturing, wholesaling, and storage), and R&D (research laboratory, professional office, and medical office).

Density/Intensity: Up to 1.0 FAR. Maximum of 3 stories or 30 feet.

Industrial Buffer (I-B)
Description: This designation is intended to accommodate office and light industrial uses in areas that are near large clusters of single-family homes, while ensuring that the light industrial uses do not adversely affect nearby homes. Proposed projects will be required to provide an acceptable transition between residential and light industrial uses. This designation also accommodates professional offices, along with low-intensity manufacturing and repair businesses that do not attract large amounts of traffic or create undue nuisance.

Allowed Land Uses: Office buildings, along with a limited range of light industrial, manufacturing, and repair businesses.

Density/Intensity: Maximum FAR ranges from 0.75 to 3.0. Maximum of 8 stories or 100 feet. Maximum height within 200 feet of University Village District is 3 stories above grade, and minimum setback from the University Village District is 50 feet.

Change Table 4-2: Land Use Classification System on page 4-13, as follows:

Table 4-2: Land Use Classification System
Major
Classes
Maximum
Density / FAR
Land Use Designation and Summary
Description
Maximum Building
Height (see zoning code for
further restrictions and
standards)

RESIDENTIAL
0 – 12 du/a Low Density Residential (R-LD). Single-family dwellings, with 2nd units allowed on some
parcels.

Maximum height of 2 stories
and 26 feet.
12 – 22 du/a Medium Density Residential (R-MD). A range of multi-family residential uses including second
units, single-family, duplex, triplex, quadplex,
rowhouses, courtyard buildings and small-scale
multi-family buildings.

Maximum height of 3 stories
and 36 feet.
22 – 43 du/a High Density Residential (R-HD). A range of multi-family housing types ranging from
townhomes to multi-family apartments at
moderate to high densities.

Maximum height of 5 stories
and 60 feet.
773
43 – 86 du/a Urban Residential (R-UHD). High-density multifamily dwellings (apartments, condos, and SROs).

Maximum height of 7 stories
and 75 feet.

COMMERCIAL
Up to 22 du/a; 1.0
FAR
Neighborhood Commercial (NC). Local-serving
retail, services and related uses.

Maximum of 3 floors or 36
feet.

Up to 2.0 FAR General Commercial (GC). Regional retail, office, and service-oriented business activities
serving a community-wide population or
broader market.

Maximum of 3 stories and 75
feet.

Up to 3.0 FAR Office (OC). Single-tenant or multi-tenant offices that include professional, legal, medical,
financial, corporate and general business
offices.

Maximum of 8 stories or 100
feet, whichever is greater.

MIXED USE
Up to 22 du/a; 1.0
FAR
Mixed Use Low (MUL). Low-density mixed-use. Maximum of 3 stories and 36 feet.

Up to 65 du/a;

1.75 FAR
Mixed Use Corridor (MUC). Multi-story mixeduse buildings. Maximum 5 stories or 60 feet.

Up to 86 du/a; 2.5
FAR
Mixed Use High (MUH). Multi-story mixed-use
buildings at a larger scale than MUC.

Maximum of 8 stories or 100
feet, whichever is greater.

Varies, see RBD
Specific Plan
RBD/4 Corners Specific Plan (RBD). Mixed use,
office, R&D, retail, civic, and medium-to highdensity residential district that implements the RBD/4 Corners Specific Plan.

Varies, see RBD Specific Plan.

INDUSTRIAL
Up to 1.0 FAR General Industrial (I-G). Industrial (storage and manufacturing), and R&D (lab/medical).

Maximum of 3 stories or 30
feet.

Ranges from 0.75
to 3.0 FAR Industrial Buffer (I-B). High-quality office buildings, along with a limited range of
manufacturing and repair businesses.

Maximum of 8 stories or 100
feet. Maximum height within
200 feet of University Village
area is 3 stories above grade.

COMMUNITY
Determined
during approval
Parks/Recreation/Conservation (PRC). Public
recreational uses, including park and open
space.
n/a
N/A
Resource Management (RM). Preservation of
sensitive open space lands in a natural
condition.
n/a
N/A
Public/Institutional (PI). Education, city
buildings, fire/police stations, & other uses.
n/a
Add section (Sec describing the population and intensity standards within the Specific Plan Area:

While descriptively summarized below, the Specific Plan has not been incorporated into the General Plan, and revisions to the Specific Plan shall not be considered an amendment to the General Plan.

The Specific Plan allows the following population densities and building intensities (1) 4 Corners Gateway allows residential densities from 22 to 86 dwelling units per 774
acre and commercial intensities between 1.0 and 2.0 FAR, (2) Bay Road Central allows residential densities between 22 and 65 dwellings per acre and commercial intensities between 0.50 and 1.0 for office/R&D/retail and between 1.0 and 2.0 for hotels, (3) Ravenswood Employment Center allows commercial intensities between

0.35 and 0.75, (4) Industrial Transition allows commercial intensities up to 0.75 FAR, (5) Waterfront Office allows commercial intensities between 0.5 and 1.5 FAR, and (6) Urban Residential allows residential intensities between 22 and 43 dwelling units per acre. The densities above assume 3.79 persons per single-family unit (attached and detached) and 2.71 persons per multi-family unit.

Edit Policy LU 2.3 on page 4-19, as follows:

Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners TOD Specific Plan Area. Prioritize the redevelopment of the Ravenswood and 4 Corners areas TOD area according to the Specific Plan. This area represents a great opportunity for significantly improving the jobs-housing balance in the City by expanding the number and diversity of employment opportunities.

Make the following changes to the University Village sub-area on page 4-45, as follows:

University Village is an established single-family residential area, which is expected to remain stable through the duration of the General Plan. The neighborhood includes Costano Elementary School and Jack Farrell Park. University Village was one of the neighborhoods that was included in the 2013 Ravenswood TOD Specific Plan.

Change policy LU 12.7 on page 4-35, as follows:

Design Development standards. Ensure that all development in the Plan Area along University Avenue and Bay Road adheres to the Specific Plan’s design objective design standards and/or design guidelines as required by State law.

Change policy LU 13.3 on page 4-37, as follows:

Jobs-focused land use. Maintain and expand the Ravenswood Employment District as a jobs center for the City. Support the development of new uses that will bring a wide range of high-quality jobs accessible to people with a variety of skill levels to the Specific Plan Area, including office, R&D, advanced manufacturing, and industrial uses.

Change policy LU 13.5 on page 4-37, as follows:

Municipal services. Reconstruct infrastructure in the Ravenswood Business District as part of the redevelopment of the area and require that new development pays its fair share of the costs for these new municipal utilities and services. to attract a diversity of employers. This will provide job opportunities for residents and new revenue for municipal services. Provide adequate water supply and sewer capacity in order to support new development.

Change policy LU 13.6 on page 4-37, as follows:

Adjacent neighborhoods and uses. Ensure that new development throughout the Plan Area maintains or improves the character of any adjacent residential neighborhoods, including the following:
775
 Require project proponents to design all new development so that it responds to the scale, grain, and character of existing nearby development.
 Require that new development “step down” in height and intensity adjacent to lower-scale residential development in adjacent residential neighborhoods outside of the Specific Plan area.
 Ensure that new development does not adversely affect the Ravenswood Open Space Preserve and the Don Edwards Refuge Palo Alto Baylands Natural Preserve.
 Maintain adequate separation or provide physical buffers (such as setbacks or landscaping) between potentially incompatible land uses.

Change policy LU 13.8 on page 4-37, as follows:

Viewsheds. Encourage developers to design projects that capitalize on views of adjacent natural resources. Require viewshed analysis as part of any potential development application, and ensure that new developments provide the view corridors identified in the Specific Plan (or an equivalent alternative that is acceptable to the City). New development shall allow for the proposed east-west view corridor through Ravenswood north of Bay Road (see Specific Plan for details).

Delete policy 13.9 on page 4-37, as follows:

Landscaping. Require that new office, industrial and R&D uses in Ravenswood provide landscaped buffers to adjacent residential areas.

Change policy LU 13.12 on page 4-37, as follows:

Expanded transit service. Work with regional transit agencies to expand transit service to the Ravenswood District. This could include adding bus rapid transit (BRT) on University Avenue, business sponsored shuttle service, an extension of light rail proposed in Menlo Park and increased public transit service connecting to the Palo Alto or Menlo Park Caltrain Stations.

Chapter 5: Economic Development
Change policy ED 1.16 on page 5-5, as follows:

Jobs impact analysis. Require employment generating all projects proposing office, R&D, or industrial uses larger than 20,000 square feet to prepare a Local Jobs Narrative jobs analysis including number of jobs, estimated wages, and estimated jobs for local residents.

Chapter 6: Transportation
Delete policy T 3.2 on page 6-20 on the loop road, as follows:

Loop road. Pursue the new multimodal Loop Road, including the Bay Trail connection, as described in the Ravenswood/4 Corners TOD Specific Plan to alleviate congestion and neighborhood traffic.
776
Revise policy T 5.1 on page 6-21 on Dumbarton rail service, as follows:

Dumbarton rail service. Support ongoing regional efforts to reintroduce passenger rail service along the Dumbarton corridor and support multimodal access improvements to future rail station(s). Future Bus Rapid Transit. Support efforts to bring BRT service to the Dumbarton corridor and enhance multimodal connections to future BRT station(s).

Chapter 9: Infrastructure, Services, and Facilities
Delete policy ISF 1.12 on page 9-7 on Ravenswood stormwater management, as follows:

Ravenswood stormwater management. All new projects in the Ravenswood TOD Specific Plan Area must follow the stormwater policies established in Goal LU-9:

Hydrological Context in the plan. Guidance in the Specific Plan supersedes policies from this General Plan.

Modify policy ISF 3.1 on page 9-9 as follows:

Sewer system maintenance. Work with the East Palo Alto Sanitary District and the West Palo Alto Sanitary District to ensure sewers are operational and in good working order. Ensure that the City’s sanitary sewer system is operational, has sufficient treatment, capacity and is in good working order.

Chapter 10: Safety and Noise
Modify policy SN 7.8 on page 10-20 as follows:

Quiet asphalt. Consider Implement the “quieter” pavement identified as a mitigation measure in the RBD/4 Corners FSEIR to reduce noise impacts along Bay Road. Encourage its use in future capital projects elsewhere in the City.

Chapter 12: Implementation
Make changes to the implementation actions indicated in the tables below. All other tables in the General Plan shall remain the same.

Table 12-2: Land Use and Urban Design Programs
Description Priority Time
Frame Responsibility

1. Review and evaluation. Work with department managers and directors in evaluating the effectiveness of the General Plan in its role in guiding city operations, development review, master planning, and budgeting. A summary of this discussion and evaluation shall be reported to the City Council on an annual basis.

High Medium Planning

2. Specific Plan Consistency. Following adoption of the General Plan, review the existing, adopted Specific Plans and make changes to ensure consistency with the General Plan.

High Short Planning/CEDD

3. Weeks Design guidelines. Update the existing design guidelines for infill projects in the Weeks neighborhood. Medium Medium Planning 777

4. Citywide objective development standards design guidelines.

Update and adopt citywide design guidelines. Create citywide objective design standards for all residential uses.

Medium Medium Planning

5. Way-finding and signage. Release an RFP to develop a way-finding program that provides directional signage, boundary markers, and monument signs for important institutions and activities within the community.

High Short Public Works
Table 12-6: Parks, Open Space, and Conservation Programs Description Priority Time
Frame Responsibility

2. Coordination with the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority (JPA). Work with the JPA on the construction of a new park or open space between Camelia Drive and the levee (south of O’Connor St).

High Short Public Works

3. Shared use agreement with School District. Create a formal shared use agreement with the Ravenswood City School
District whereby the public and organizations (such as youth and adult intramural leagues) can access school fields/property after normal school hours.

High Short City Manager

4. Agreement with Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge. Establish a formal cooperative agreement with the Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge and develop programs to encourage public recreational use of the Bay Trail and trails in and adjacent to the Baylands Nature Preserve and the South Bay Salt Pond Restoration Project.

Medium Medium City Manager

5. Agreement to Manage Cooley Landing. Continue to maintain an agreement for a non-profit or other entity to manage Cooley Landing
Medium Ongoing City Manager

6. Bird-safe design. Adopt bird-safe design guidelines for new buildings and structures adjacent to the Bay. Medium Medium Planning

7. Light pollution guidelines. Adopt guidelines for outdoor lighting located adjacent to wildlife areas that will keep the amount of light that reaches wildlife habitat areas to a minimum.

Low Medium Planning

8. Community space fund. Maintain development fee programs to accumulate funds for the acquisition and improvement of parks and public gathering places and facilities.

Medium Medium City Manager/
CEDD

9. Tree Planting program. Partner with local non-profit organizations to implement a tree planting program (planting of trees on City owned property).

High Short Public Works

10. Citizen reporting. Create a program and/or methods for residents to monitor and report vandalism along with
maintenance issues in parks and public Right-of-Way.

High Short Public Works

11. Feral Cat Program. Work with partners to consider
establishment of a year-round cat program or fund one as cats prey on the salt water harvest mouse which is a Federally protected species in accordance with the ESA. This condition Medium Medium Public Works
778
originates in the Cooley Landing environmental clearance document.

Table 12-7: Infrastructure, Services, and Facilities Programs Description Priority Time
Frame Responsibility

PUBLIC FACITILIES

1. Development impact fees. Adopt nexus-based impact fees that mitigate the cost of providing infrastructure and public facilities to serve new development. Address infrastructure improvements that are necessitated by new development – including for water, sewer, stormwater, and utilities. Seek additional funding mechanisms as necessary. Updates to
impact fees. Approximately every five years, conduct the necessary nexus fee study to update the City’s
development impact fees.

High Ongoing Planning/CEDD/
Public Works

2. Outside community funding. Create an outreach program or plan to match Silicon Valley donors and funding dollars to community needs such as schools, public space
improvements, jobs training, or support for artists.

Medium Ongoing City Manager

3. TOT program evaluation. Seek an independent evaluation of the Measure C Program/Transient Occupancy Tax
program.

Low Short City Manager

4. New teen center. Work with local service providers, such as the YMCA, to create a “teen center” for East Palo Alto teens. The teen center could provide tutoring and
mentorship programs and provide a safe and affordable
place for youth after school and on weekends.

High Long City Manager

FLOODING

1. Levee and creek maintenance. Negotiate an agreement with Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) for maintenance of the San Francisquito Creek enhanced levee and creek banks from Highway 101 to the border with Menlo Park.

Medium Short Public Works

2. Coastal flooding analysis. Complete an analysis of the City’s vulnerability to coastal flooding and sea level rise. Inspect and review the levees in the Baylands.

Low Short Public Works

3. Upstream San Francisquito Creek SAFER BAY flood protection project. Work with the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority (SFCJPA) and adjacent property owners on the planning and design of flood control improvements upstream of Highway 101 along the City’s eastern limits. Seek outside grant funding as available to implement comprehensive flood control
improvements.

High Long Public Works
779
Table 12-8: Safety and Noise Programs
Description Priority Time
Frame Responsibility

1. Flood control master plan. Prepare a flood control master plan to assess the adequacy of the City’s flood control system as a whole. Implement improvements as warranted and as
feasible. Seek outside funding as available to implement improvements.

High Short Public Works

2. Fire buffer zones. Work with property owners near hazard areas to implement and maintain buffer zones from the
riskiest areas and adopt fire code revisions when appropriate.

Medium Short Planning

3. Hazard Mitigation Planning. Adopt and develop both a Multihazard Mitigation plan and a Recovery Action Plan to guide growth and development in the event of a widespread
destructive event.

High Short Planning

4. Coordinated emergency response. Implement coordinated emergency response planning with the Menlo Park Fire
Protection District, major transportation agencies, and adjacent jurisdictions.

Medium Ongoing
Police/City
Manager/Public
Works

5. Hazardous emergency plan. Develop and implement a multihazard emergency plan for accidents involving hazardous materials.

Medium Medium Public Works

6. Noise Ordinance. Amend the Noise Ordinance to require that interior noise levels attributable to exterior sources shall not exceed 45 dB (Ldn or CNEL) when the outdoor noise level exceeds 60 dB (Ldn or CNEL)1 for all new hotels, motels, dormitories, apartment houses, and single-family dwellings.

Medium Short Planning

7. Quiet asphalt. Select a “quieter” pavement that also meets other criteria established by the City for pavements for use in resurfacing roadways. Require its use in future capital projects.

Implement the “quieter” pavement identified as a mitigation measure in the RBD/4 Corners FSEIR to reduce noise impacts along Bay Road. Encourage its use in future capital projects elsewhere in the City.

Low
Ongoing
Medium
High Public Works

8. Public disaster training. Conduct training exercises about earthquakes, fires, floods, and other natural and man-made disasters that are most likely to strike East Palo Alto.

Medium Ongoing
City Manager/
Community
Programs
Table 12-9: Transportation Physical Improvements
Description Priority Time
Frame Responsibility

1. Highway 101 Pedestrian / Bicycle Overcrossing. This project is intended to link the residents of the Woodland Neighborhood with City services and recreation opportunities on the other High Medium Public Works
780
side of the freeway. Coordinate with Caltrans on the design and construction and seek grant funding for construction costs.

2. University Avenue Interchange. This project will provide for the widening of the University Avenue/US 101 overpass to provide safer pedestrian and bicycle travel and more efficient vehicle travel.

High Medium Public Works

3. Bay Road improvements. Coordinate with PG&E and the City’s other utility providers and East Palo Alto Sanitary District on the Bay Road Improvement Phase II/III. Construct the necessary roadway and infrastructure improvements in order to revitalize the Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners TOD Specific Plan area and provide the foundation for an active “main street” environment, including street paving, pedestrian and bicycle improvements, landscaping improvements, streetscape
improvements, and undergrounding of utilities.

High Medium Public Works

4. Street Light Upgrade Project. Complete the Street Light Upgrade Project, including a luminosity study to identify locations where additional new street lights need to be installed, and the installation of LED lights.

High Medium Public Works

5. Signage and Striping Improvements. Install new signage and striping to improve vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle safety throughout the City.

Medium Medium Public Works

6. Pedestrian Accessibility Improvements. Improvements include but are not limited to corner ramps. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and California State Law require these
improvements.

Medium Medium Public Works

7. Institute Traffic Calming Program. This includes the planning and construction of speed bumps, bulb outs and other traffic calming devices to reduce speed through residential zones and to increase safety, with priority corridors identified in Figure 7 of the Circulation Element, in coordination with other City Departments.

High Medium Public Works

8. Widen Bay Road Phase II. Build the Bay Road Phase II project, which will build Coordinate with developers to facilitate the acquisition of (or purchase the necessary right-of-way outright) of portions of Bay Road needed to construct a multimodal roadway with attractive streetscape along Bay Road between Pulgas Ave Clarke Ave. and the entrance to Cooley Landing.

High Medium Public Works
Table 12-11: Infrastructure, Services, and Facilities Physical Improvements Description Priority Time
Frame Responsibility

PUBLIC FACILITIES

1. Police Department and Corporation Yard. Relocate the Police Station at 141 Demeter Street and the Corporation Yard at 150 Tara Street to a different location outside of the Special Flood Hazard Area or in an area that will have
continual access.

High Short Public Works
781

2. New facilities in Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners TOD Specific Plan Area. As part of new developments in the Specific Plan, facilitate the construction of identified community facilities: community organization spaces,
subsidized retail & merchant spaces, job training center(s), city hall/government services center, community center(s), childcare, resource center, and commercial kitchen(s).

Alternatively, leverage impact fees paid by new
developments to fund the construction of these facilities and issue RFPs for design, construction, and management of these new facilities. Coordinate with San Mateo County on the construction of the Public Library. Construct the three major community facility improvements identified in the Ravenswood TOD Specific Plan: a recreation center, a
community center at 4 Corners and a library expansion.

Issue RFPs for
Medium Long City Manager

3. Performing arts center. Develop a performing arts center and/or cultural center(s) that includes indoor and outdoor performance areas.

Low Long City Manager

4. Community Development building improvements. Improve the physical condition of the Community Development
Department building through needed upgrades.

High Short Public Works

WATER INFRASTRUCTURE

1. Gloria Way well retrofit. Assess the hydrological condition of the existing well at Gloria Way / Bay Road and install the necessary treatment systems to utilize this well for
additional water supply.

High Short Public Works

2. New water storage tanks. Construct two new storage tanks with the capacity to meet emergency supply needs for the current and anticipated future population of the City.

Identify a future location for a 1+ MGD water tank within the Specific Plan Area. potential locations for one storage tank on the east side of Highway 101 and one storage tank on the west side of Highway 101.

High Medium Public Works

3. Second groundwater well. Construct a 1,000 gallon per minute (GPM) groundwater well and associated ironmanganese treatment system to supplement the City’s existing water supply (in addition to Gloria Way).

High Medium Public Works

4. Water main replacement. Continue to replace deficient water mains in the City’s water delivery system as funding is secured, improving available fire flow throughout the system.

High Ongoing Public Works

5. Water meter replacement. Replace water meters, water meter boxes, and lids as specified in the Water System
Master Plan.

High Ongoing Public Works

6. Water valve replacement. Perform regular maintenance on or replace the 908 existing valves in the City’s water system.

Medium Ongoing Public Works
782

7. Groundwater monitoring. Install a monitoring network to monitor saline levels and other factors that could impact the City’s groundwater resources.

High Short Public Works

PUBLIC SAFETY

1. New Police Department building. Establish and/or construct a permanent facility for the East Palo Alto Police Department (current facility is leased). Seek grant funding for this project.

Medium Long Police

SEWER/STORMWATWER INFRASTRUCTURE

1. Martin Luther King Jr. Park stormwater project. Construct a storage chamber, tertiary treatment system and irrigation pump at Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) Park to reuse storm water to irrigate the park.

Low Medium Public
Works

2. O’Connor Pump Station improvements. Complete recommended safety and reliability improvements to the existing pump station.

Replace the existing pump station during San Francisquito Creek levee construction.

High Short Public
Works

3. O’Connor Pump Station replacement. Replace the existing pump station during San Francisquito Creek levee construction. Medium Long Public Works

4. Runnymede Storm Drain. Complete the second phase of the Runnymede project, which consists of dredging the existing storm drainage canal from the Runnymede Street outfall to the detention pond at the O’Connor Pump Station, and extending culverts from Bay Road.

High Short Public
Works

5. University Village outfalls. Complete the repair and maintenance of three storm drain outfalls located near the University Village neighborhood (eastern end of Purdue Avenue, the northern end of Fordham Street and the eastern end of Stevens Avenue). As storm drain improvements occur in the Specific Plan Area (north of Bay Road), remove the three outfalls that currently exist in the University Village neighborhood.

Medium
Long Medium Public Works

6. Storm Drain Master Plan implementation. Implement necessary improvements to the City’s storm drain system identified in the Storm Drain Master Plan. Utilize the master plan for making longterm strategic decisions on new drain infrastructure investments, and regularly update.

High Long Public Works

7. Sewer Master Plan implementation. Implement the necessary improvements to the City’s sanitary sewer system identified in the most current version of the Sewer Master Plan and Chapter 9 of the Specific Plan. 2015 Sewer Master Plan Update for the East Palo Alto Sanitary District.

Medium Long Public
Works
783
Modifications to General Plan Figures
Replace Figure 4-2 with the following figure.

Figure 4-2: General Plan Land Use Designations
784
Replace Figure 4-2B with the following figure.

Figure 4-2B: General Plan Land Use Designations, Northeast 785
Replace Figure 4-8 with the following figure.

Figure 4-8: 4 Corners/Bay Road Corridor Land Use Designations 786
Replace Figure 4-9 with the following figure.

Figure 4-9: Ravenswood Business District Designations
787
Replace Figure 6-1 with the following figure.

Figure 61: Truck Routes
788
Replace Figure 6-5 with the following figure.

Figure 65: Existing and Proposed Bicycle Network
Sewer system maintenance. Work with the East Palo Alto Sanitary District and the West Palo Alto Sanitary District to ensure sewers are operational and in good working 789
order. Ensure that the City’s sanitary sewer system is operational, has sufficient treatment, capacity and is in good working order.

Chapter 10: Safety and Noise
Modify policy SN 7.8 on page 10-20 as follows:

Quiet asphalt. Consider Implement the “quieter” pavement identified as a mitigation measure in the RBD/4 Corners FSEIR to reduce noise impacts along Bay Road.

Encourage its use in future capital projects elsewhere in the City.

Chapter 12: Implementation
Make changes to the implementation actions indicated in the tables below. All other tables in the General Plan shall remain the same.

Table 12-2: Land Use and Urban Design Programs
Description Priority Time Frame Responsibility

1. Review and
evaluation. Work
with department
managers and
directors in
evaluating the
effectiveness of the
General Plan in its
role in guiding city
operations,
development
review, master
planning, and
budgeting. A
summary of this
discussion and
evaluation shall be
reported to the City
High Medium Planning
790
Council on an
annual basis.

2. Specific Plan
Consistency.

Following adoption
of the General Plan,
review the existing,
adopted Specific
Plans and make
changes to ensure
consistency with the
General Plan.

High Short Planning/CEDD

3. Weeks Design
guidelines. Update
the existing design
guidelines for infill
projects in the
Weeks
neighborhood.

Medium Medium Planning

4. Citywide objective
development
standards design
guidelines. Update
and adopt citywide
design guidelines.

Create citywide
objective design
standards for all
residential uses.

Medium Medium Planning

5. Way-finding and
signage. Release an
RFP to develop a
way-finding
program that
provides directional
signage, boundary
markers, and
monument signs for
important
institutions and
activities within the
community.

High Short Public Works
791
Table 12-6: Parks, Open Space, and Conservation Programs Description Priority Time Frame Responsibility

2. Coordination with
the San
Francisquito Creek
Joint Powers
Authority (JPA).

Work with the JPA
on the construction
of a new park or
open space
between Camelia
Drive and the levee
(south of O’Connor
St).

High Short Public Works

3. Shared use
agreement with
School District.

Create a formal
shared use
agreement with the
Ravenswood City
School District
whereby the public
and organizations
(such as youth and
adult intramural
leagues) can access
school
fields/property after
normal school
hours.

High Short City Manager

4. Agreement with
Don Edwards San
Francisco Bay
National Wildlife
Refuge. Establish a
formal cooperative
agreement with the
Don Edwards San
Francisco Bay
Medium Medium City Manager
792
National Wildlife
Refuge and develop
programs to
encourage public
recreational use of
the Bay Trail and
trails in and
adjacent to the
Baylands Nature
Preserve and the
South Bay Salt Pond
Restoration Project.

5. Agreement to
Manage Cooley
Landing. Continue
to maintain an
agreement for a
non-profit or other
entity to manage
Cooley Landing
Medium Ongoing City Manager

6. Bird-safe design.

Adopt bird-safe
design guidelines
for new buildings
and structures
adjacent to the Bay.

Medium Medium Planning

7. Light pollution
guidelines. Adopt
guidelines for
outdoor lighting
located adjacent to
wildlife areas that
will keep the
amount of light that
reaches wildlife
habitat areas to a
minimum.

Low Medium Planning

8. Community space
fund. Maintain
development fee
programs to
accumulate funds
for the acquisition
and improvement
of parks and public
Medium Medium
City Manager/
CEDD
793
gathering places
and facilities.

9. Tree Planting
program. Partner
with local non-profit
organizations to
implement a tree
planting program
(planting of trees on
City owned
property).

High Short Public Works

10. Citizen reporting.

Create a program
and/or methods for
residents to monitor
and report
vandalism along
with maintenance
issues in parks and
public Right-of-Way.

High Short Public Works

11. Feral Cat Program.

Work with partners
to consider
establishment of a
year-round cat
program or fund
one as cats prey on
the salt water
harvest mouse
which is a Federally
protected species in
accordance with the
ESA. This condition
originates in the
Cooley Landing
environmental
clearance
document.

Medium Medium Public Works
Table 12-7: Infrastructure, Services, and Facilities Programs 794
Description Priority Time Frame Responsibility

PUBLIC FACITILIES

1. Development
impact fees. Adopt
nexus-based impact
fees that mitigate
the cost of
providing
infrastructure and
public facilities to
serve new
development.

Address
infrastructure
improvements that
are necessitated by
new development –
including for water,
sewer, stormwater,
and utilities. Seek
additional funding
mechanisms as
necessary. Updates
to impact fees.

Approximately
every five years,
conduct the
necessary nexus fee
study to update the
City’s development
impact fees.

High Ongoing
Planning/CEDD/
Public Works

2. Outside community
funding. Create an
outreach program
or plan to match
Silicon Valley donors
and funding dollars
to community
needs such as
schools, public
space
improvements, jobs
training, or support
for artists.

Medium Ongoing City Manager
795

3. TOT program
evaluation. Seek an
independent
evaluation of the
Measure C
Program/Transient
Occupancy Tax
program.

Low Short City Manager

4. New teen center.

Work with local
service providers,
such as the YMCA,
to create a “teen
center” for East Palo
Alto teens. The teen
center could
provide tutoring
and mentorship
programs and
provide a safe and
affordable place for
youth after school
and on weekends.

High Long City Manager

FLOODING
1 .

Levee and creek
maintenance. Negotiate
an agreement with
Santa Clara Valley Water
District (SCVWD) for
maintenance of the San
Francisquito Creek
enhanced levee and
creek banks from
Highway 101 to the
border with Menlo Park.

Medium Short Public Works
2 .

Coastal flooding
analysis. Complete an
analysis of the City’s
vulnerability to coastal
flooding and sea level
rise. Inspect and review
Low Short Public Works
796
the levees in the
Baylands.
3 .

Upstream San
Francisquito Creek
SAFER BAY flood
protection project.

Work with the San
Francisquito Creek Joint
Powers Authority
(SFCJPA) and adjacent
property owners on the
planning and design of
flood control
improvements
upstream of Highway
101 along the City’s
eastern limits. Seek
outside grant funding as
available to implement
comprehensive flood
control improvements.

High Long Public Works
Table 12-8: Safety and Noise Programs
Description Priority Time Frame Responsibility

1. Flood control
master plan.

Prepare a flood
control master plan
to assess the
adequacy of the
City’s flood control
system as a whole.

Implement
improvements as
warranted and as
feasible. Seek
outside funding as
High Short Public Works
797
available to
implement
improvements.

2. Fire buffer zones.

Work with property
owners near hazard
areas to implement
and maintain buffer
zones from the
riskiest areas and
adopt fire code
revisions when
appropriate.

Medium Short Planning

3. Hazard Mitigation
Planning. Adopt
and develop both a
Multi-hazard
Mitigation plan and
a Recovery Action
Plan to guide
growth and
development in the
event of a
widespread
destructive event.

High Short Planning

4. Coordinated
emergency
response.

Implement
coordinated
emergency
response planning
with the Menlo Park
Fire Protection
District, major
transportation
agencies, and
adjacent
jurisdictions.

Medium Ongoing
Police/City
Manager/Public
Works

5. Hazardous
emergency plan.

Develop and
implement a multihazard emergency
plan for accidents
Medium Medium Public Works
798
involving hazardous
materials.

6. Noise Ordinance.

Amend the Noise
Ordinance to
require that interior
noise levels
attributable to
exterior sources
shall not exceed 45
dB (Ldn or CNEL)
when the outdoor
noise level exceeds
60 dB (Ldn or
CNEL)1 for all new
hotels, motels,
dormitories,
apartment houses,
and single-family
dwellings.

Medium Short Planning

7. Quiet asphalt.

Select a “quieter”
pavement that also
meets other criteria
established by the
City for pavements
for use in
resurfacing
roadways. Require
its use in future
capital projects.

Implement the
“quieter” pavement
identified as a
mitigation measure
in the RBD/4
Corners FSEIR to
reduce noise
impacts along Bay
Road. Encourage its
use in future capital
projects elsewhere
in the City.

Low Ongoing Medium High Public Works
799

8. Public disaster
training. Conduct
training exercises
about earthquakes,
fires, floods, and
other natural and
man-made disasters
that are most likely
to strike East Palo
Alto.

Medium Ongoing
City Manager/
Community
Programs
Table 12-9: Transportation Physical Improvements
Description Priority Time Frame Responsibility

Coordinate with
Caltrans on the
design and
construction and
seek grant funding
for construction
costs.

High Medium Public Works

2. University Avenue
Interchange. This
project will provide
for the widening of
the University
Avenue/US 101
overpass to provide
High Medium Public Works
800
safer pedestrian
and bicycle travel
and more efficient
vehicle travel.

3. Bay Road
improvements.

Coordinate with
PG&E and the City’s
other utility
providers and East
Palo Alto Sanitary
District on the Bay
Road Improvement
Phase II/III.

Construct the
necessary roadway
and infrastructure
improvements in
order to revitalize
the Ravenswood
Business District/4
Corners TOD
Specific Plan area
and provide the
foundation for an
active “main street”
environment,
including street
paving, pedestrian
and bicycle
improvements,
landscaping
improvements,
streetscape
improvements, and
undergrounding of
utilities.

High
Medium Public Works

4. Street Light
Upgrade Project.

Complete the Street
Light Upgrade
Project, including a
luminosity study to
identify locations
where additional
new street lights
need to be installed,
High Medium Public Works
801
and the installation
of LED lights.

5. Signage and
Striping
Improvements.

Install new signage
and striping to
improve vehicular,
pedestrian and
bicycle safety
throughout the City.

Medium Medium Public Works

6. Pedestrian
Accessibility
Improvements.

Improvements
include but are not
limited to corner
ramps. Americans
with Disabilities Act
(ADA) and California
State Law require
these
improvements.

Medium Medium Public Works

7. Institute Traffic
Calming Program.

This includes the
planning and
construction of
speed bumps, bulb
outs and other
traffic calming
devices to reduce
speed through
residential zones
and to increase
safety, with priority
corridors identified
in Figure 7 of the
Circulation Element,
in coordination with
other City
Departments.

High Medium Public Works
802

8. Widen Bay Road
Phase II. Build the
Bay Road Phase II
project, which will
build Coordinate
with developers to
facilitate the
acquisition of (or
purchase the
necessary right-ofway outright) of
portions of Bay
Road needed to
construct a
multimodal
roadway with
attractive
streetscape along
Bay Road between
Pulgas Ave Clarke
Ave. and the
entrance to Cooley
Landing.

High Medium Public Works
Table 12-11: Infrastructure, Services, and Facilities Physical Improvements Description Priority Time Frame Responsibility

PUBLIC FACILITIES

1. Police Department
and Corporation
Yard. Relocate the
Police Station at 141
Demeter Street and
the Corporation
Yard at 150 Tara
Street to a different
location outside of
the Special Flood
Hazard Area or in an
area that will have
continual access.

High Short Public Works
803

2. New facilities in
Ravenswood
Business District/4
Corners TOD
Specific Plan Area.

As part of new
developments in
the Specific Plan,
facilitate the
construction of
identified
community
facilities:
community
organization spaces,
subsidized retail &
merchant spaces,
job training
center(s), city
hall/government
services center,
community
center(s), childcare,
resource center, and
commercial
kitchen(s).

Alternatively,
leverage impact
fees paid by new
developments to
fund the
construction of
these facilities and
issue RFPs for
design,
construction, and
management of
these new facilities.

Coordinate with San
Mateo County on
the construction of
the Public Library.

Construct the three
major community
facility
improvements
identified in the
Ravenswood TOD
Medium Long City Manager
804
Specific Plan: a
recreation center, a
community center
at 4 Corners and a
library expansion.

Issue RFPs for

3. Performing arts
center. Develop a
performing arts
center and/or
cultural center(s)
that includes indoor
and outdoor
performance areas.

Low Long City Manager

4. Community
Development
building
improvements.

Improve the
physical condition
of the Community
Development
Department
building through
needed upgrades.

High Short Public Works

WATER INFRASTRUCTURE

1. Gloria Way well
retrofit. Assess the
hydrological
condition of the
existing well at
Gloria Way / Bay
Road and install
the necessary
treatment systems
to utilize this well
for additional
water supply.

High Short Public Works

2. New water storage
tanks. Construct
two new storage
tanks with the
capacity to meet
High Medium Public Works
805
emergency supply
needs for the
current and
anticipated future
population of the
City. Identify a
future location for
a 1+ MGD water
tank within the
Specific Plan Area.
potential locations
for one storage
tank on the east
side of Highway
101 and one
storage tank on the
west side of
Highway 101.

3. Second
groundwater well.

Construct a 1,000
gallon per minute
(GPM)
groundwater well
and associated
iron-manganese
treatment system
to supplement the
City’s existing
water supply (in
addition to Gloria
Way).

High Medium Public Works

4. Water main
replacement.

Continue to
replace deficient
water mains in the
City’s water
delivery system as
funding is secured,
improving available
fire flow
throughout the
system.

High Ongoing Public Works
806

5. Water
meterreplacement
. Replace water
meters, water
meter boxes, and
lids as specified in
the Water System
Master Plan.

High Ongoing Public Works

6. Water valve
replacement.

Perform regular
maintenance on or
replace the 908
existing valves in
the City’s water
system.

Medium Ongoing Public Works

7. Groundwater
monitoring. Install
a monitoring
network to monitor
saline levels and
other factors that
could impact the
City’s groundwater
resources.

High Short Public Works

PUBLIC SAFETY

1. New Police
Department building.

Establish and/or
construct a permanent
facility for the East Palo
Alto Police Department
(current facility is
leased). Seek grant
funding for this project.

Medium Long Police
807

SEWER/STORMWATWER INFRASTRUCTURE

1. Martin Luther King Jr.

Park stormwater
project. Construct a
storage chamber,
tertiary treatment
system and irrigation
pump at Martin Luther
King Jr. (MLK) Park to
reuse storm water to
irrigate the park.

Low Medium Public Works

2. O’Connor Pump
Station improvements.

Complete
recommended safety
and reliability
improvements to the
existing pump station.

Replace the existing
pump station during
San Francisquito Creek
levee construction.

High Short Public Works

3. O’Connor Pump
Station replacement.

Replace the existing
pump station during
San Francisquito Creek
levee construction.

Medium Long Public Works

4. Runnymede Storm
Drain. Complete the
second phase of the
Runnymede project,
which consists of
dredging the existing
storm drainage canal
from the Runnymede
Street outfall to the
detention pond at the
O’Connor Pump
Station, and extending
culverts from Bay Road.

High Short Public Works
808

5. University Village
outfalls. Complete the
repair and
maintenance of three
storm drain outfalls
located near the
University Village
neighborhood (eastern
end of Purdue Avenue,
the northern end of
Fordham Street and
the eastern end of
Stevens Avenue). As
storm drain
improvements occur in
the Specific Plan Area
(north of Bay Road),
remove the three
outfalls that currently
exist in the University
Village neighborhood.

Medium
Long
Medium Public Works

6. Storm Drain Master
Plan implementation.

Implement necessary
improvements to the
City’s storm drain
system identified in the
Storm Drain Master
Plan. Utilize the master
plan for making longterm strategic decisions
on new drain
infrastructure
investments, and
regularly update.

High
Long Public Works

7. Sewer Master Plan
implementation.

Implement the
necessary
improvements to the
City’s sanitary sewer
system identified in the
most current version of
the Sewer Master Plan
Medium Long Public Works
809
and Chapter 9 of the
Specific Plan. 2015
Sewer Master Plan
Update for the East
Palo Alto Sanitary
District.
810
PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 8.1
ATTACHMENT - 7 Published Notice

CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO
Planning Division
1960 Tate Street, East Palo Alto, CA 94303
Phone (650) 853-3189

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, on November 18, 2024, the Planning Commission of the City of East Palo Alto reviewed and considered the proposed Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners Specific Plan Update, Associated General Plan and Development Code Amendments and Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (FSEIR) pertaining to an approximately 207-acre Ravenswood Business District /4 Corners Specific Plan area located in the northeastern area of East Palo Alto, in southern San Mateo County and the Planning Commission has recommended that the East Palo Alto City Council:

1. Approve the amendments to the General Plan;

2. Approve the Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners Specific Plan as revised; and

3. Approve the amendments to Zoning/Development Code and zoning map.

Public Hearing: On Tuesday, December 3, 2024, at the hour of 6:30 PM, or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in the City Council Chambers at 2415 University Avenue, East Palo Alto, the City of East Palo Alto City Council will conduct a public meeting on the following item:

Project Description: Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners Specific Plan Update, Associated General Plan and Development Code Amendments and Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (FSEIR)
Lead Agency: City of East Palo Alto
Project Location: The approximately 207-acre Ravenswood Business District /4 Corners Specific Plan area is located in the northeastern area of East Palo Alto, in southern San Mateo County.

The project site is generally bounded by the City Limits/Union Pacific Railroad tracks to the north, Weeks Street or Runnymede Street to the south, University Avenue and Gloria Way or the edge of the University Village neighborhood to the west, and the Ravenswood Open Space Preserve and Don Edwards Reserve/Palo Alto Baylands 811

Page 2 ends

East Palo Alto City CouncilDecember 3, 2024

East Palo Alto City Council
December 3, 2024