87° West 17.27 feet, South 7° 27' West 145.68 feet and South 87° East 142.50 feet to the point of beginning.
Parcel II:
The Northerly 50 feet front and rear measurements of Lot 22 in Block 9, and the adjacent portion of 178
551\95\5023655.3 15
the Easterly one-half of unnamed alley way, as delineated upon that certain Map entitled "Map of Woodland Place, Subdivision No. One of Ravenswood, San Mateo County, California", filed for record in the Office of the Recorder of the County of San Mateo, State of California, on August 1st, 1910 in Book 7 of Maps, at Page 24.
JPN: 063-028-282-08A
APN: 063-282-080
2036 Euclid Avenue
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF EAST PALO
ALTO, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
Portion of Lots 5 and 6 in Block 9 and portion of Euclid Avenue and the alley adjacent thereto, all as shown on the Map entitled "Map of Woodland Place Subdivision No. One of Ravenswood, San Mateo County, California", filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Mateo County, State of California on August 1, 1910 in Book 7 of Maps at Page 24, more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at a point in the centerline of Euclid Avenue, distant thereon North 10° 19' East 284.12 feet from the point of intersection thereof with the centerline of O'Connor Street; running thence along said centerline of Euclid Avenue, North 10° 19' East 50.03 feet; thence leaving said line South 79° 41' East 170.13 feet to a point in the centerline of the alley running through said Block; thence along said centerline, South 7° 27' West 50.18 feet and thence North 79° 41' West 172.77 feet to the point of beginning. Excepting therefrom the Northwesterly 20 feet thereof. Also excepting therefrom that parcel of land conveyed to Isabel Lang and husband, by Deed from Elmer D. Cole and wife, dated December 22, 1948 and recorded December 2, 1949 in Book 1753, of Official Records at Page 716, Records of San Mateo County, California.
JPN: 063-028-282-04A
APN: 063-282-040
2040-2042 Euclid Avenue
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF EAST PALO
ALTO, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
PORTION OF LOTS 5 AND 6 IN BLOCK 9, AS DESIGNATED ON THE MAP ENTITLED, "MAP OF WOODLAND PLACE SUBDIVISION NO. ONE OF RAVENSWOOD SAN MATEO COUNTY CALIFORNIA", WHICH MAP WAS FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ON AUGUST 1, 1910 IN BOOK 7 OF MAPS AT PAGE 24, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE CENTERLINE OF EUCLID AVENUE, DISTANT THEREON NORTH 10° 19' EAST 332.15 FEET FROM THE INTERSECTION OF SAID CENTERLINE WITH THE CENTERLINE 179
551\95\5023655.3 16
OF O'CONNOR STREET, AS SAID AVENUE AND STREET APPEAR ON THE MAP ABOVE REFERRED TO; THENCE RUNNING NORTH 10° 19' EAST AND ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF EUCLID AVENUE 43.10 FEET, TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF THE LANDS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED FROM DEWEY G. LANG AND WIFE TO ELMER D. COLE AND WIFE, DATED DECEMBER 14, 1948 AND RECORDED DECEMBER 16, 1948 IN BOOK 1604 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAN MATEO COUNTY, PAGE 3 (67437-H) THENCE SOUTH 79° 41' EAST ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE LAST MENTIONED LANDS 167.99 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE LANDS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED FROM CLAUDE C.
TAYLOR AND WIFE TO ROTTA J. DONAGHU, DATED NOVEMBER 20, 1942 AND RECORDED NOVEMBER 24, 1942 IN BOOK 1037 OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAN MATEO AT PAGE 410 (69331-E); THENCE ALONG THE LAST MENTIONED LINE SOUTH 7° 27' WEST
43.02 FEET MORE OR LESS TO A POINT WHICH BEARS SOUTH 79° 41' EAST 170.23 FEET FROM THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 79° 41' WEST 170.23 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
JPN: 063-028-282-05A
APN: 063-282-050
2041 Euclid Avenue, also known as 420 E. O'Keefe
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF EAST PALO
ALTO, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
PORTION OF LOTS 5, 6 AND 7 IN BLOCK 10, AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN MAP ENTITLED "MAP OF WOODLAND PLACE SUBDIVISION NO. ONE OF RAVENSWOOD, SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, PROPERTY OF RAVENSWOOD INVESTMENT CO., INC.", FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN MATEO COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ON AUGUST 1, 1910 IN BOOK 7 OF MAPS AT PAGE 24, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID BLOCK 10, DISTANT THEREON NORTH 10° 19' EAST 12.87 FEET FROM THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 6 IN BLOCK 10,
SAID POINT OF BEGINNING BEING ON THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF O'KEEFE STREET, AS ESTABLISHED BY THAT CERTAIN DEED FROM LLOYD G. SLOAN AND IRENE L. SLOAN, HIS WIFE TO THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, DATED SEPTEMBER 15, 1961 AND RECORDED NOVEMBER 6, 1961 IN BOOK 4087 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AT PAGE 338 (FILE NO. 11817-U), RECORDS OF SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA;
THENCE FROM SAID TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF O'KEEFE STREET, SOUTH 79° 41' EAST 59 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 10° 19' WEST 87.87 FEET; THENCE NORTH 79° 41' WEST 59 FEET TO THE ABOVE MENTIONED WESTERLY LINE OF BLOCK 10; THENCE ALONG SAID LAST MENTIONED LINE, NORTH 10° 19' EAST 87.87
FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING
JPN: 063-028-281-11A
APN: 063-281-110
180
551\95\5023655.3 17
2043 Euclid Avenue
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF EAST PALO
ALTO, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
Portion of Lots 5, 6 and 7 in Block 10, as shown on that certain Map Entitled "Map of Woodland Place Subdivision No. One of Ravenswood, San Mateo County, California, property of Ravenswood Investment Co., Inc.", filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Mateo County, State of California, on August 1, 1910 in Book 7 of Maps at Page 24, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Westerly boundary line of Euclid Avenue, at the intersection thereof with the dividing line between Lots 6 and 7 in said Block 10; thence from said point of beginning along said Westerly line of Euclid Avenue, North 10° 19' East, 12.87 feet to the intersection thereof with the Southerly boundary line of O'Keefe Street, as established by that certain Deed from Laurence R. Hubbard and Leona J. Hubbard, his wife, and Kenneth R. Hubbard, to the County of San Mateo, Dated November 21, 1960 and Recorded July 10, 1961 in Book 4014 of Official Records, at
thence leaving said Southerly line of O'Keefe, South 10° 19' West, 87.87 feet; thence parallel with said dividing line between Lots 6 and 7, South 79° 41' East, 61 feet to said Westerly line of Euclid Avenue, thence along said last mentioned line, North 10° 19' East 75 feet to the point of beginning.
JPN: 063-028-281-10A
APN: 063-281-100
2044 Euclid Avenue
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF EAST PALO
ALTO, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
Beginning at a point in the centerline of Euclid Avenue distant thereon North 10° 19' East 375.25 feet from its intersection with the centerline of O'Connor Street; thence from said point of beginning at right angles with Euclid Avenue, South 79° 41' East 167.99 feet , more or less, to the Westerly line of property now or formerly of Retta J. Donaghu; thence along said boundary North 7° 27' East 55.06 feet, more or less, to the Southerly boundary of property conveyed to Richard Jordan and Lillian Jordan, his wife, by Deed dated January 21, 1942 and recorded January 22, 1942 in Book 1005 of Official Records at Page 42; thence along said Southerly boundary North 79° 41' West 165.24 feet to said centerline of Euclid Avenue; thence along said centerline of Euclid Avenue South 10° 19' West
55.00 feet to the point of beginning. Being a portion of Block 9 as shown on that certain Map entitled "Map of Woodland Place Subdivision No. One of Ravenswood, San Mateo County, California, property of Ravenswood Investment Co., Inc.", filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Mateo County, State of California on August 1, 1910 in Book 7 of Maps at Page 24. 181
551\95\5023655.3 18
JPN: 063-028-282-06A
APN: 063-282-060
2054 Euclid Avenue
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF EAST PALO
ALTO, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
Portion of Block 9 as shown on that certain Map entitled "Map of Woodland Place, Subdivision No.
One or Ravenswood, San Mateo County, California", filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Mateo County, State of California on August 1, 1910 in Book 7 of Maps at Page 24, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Easterly line of Euclid Avenue said point being North 10° 19' East 430.25 feet and South 79° 41' East 30 feet from the intersection of the centerline of Euclid Avenue with the centerline of O'Connor Street as said Avenue and Street are shown on the above mentioned map; thence from said point of beginning South 79° 41' East 135.24 feet, more or less, to the Westerly line of property now or formerly of Claude C. Taylor and wife; thence along said boundary North 7° 27' East 37.47 feet to the Southwesterly line of the lands described in the Deed from Nelson D. Gustin and wife to the State of California dated December 27, 1955 and recorded April 29, 1956 in Book 3009 at Page 327 of Official Records (47170-N); thence Northwesterly along said Southwesterly line 156.66 feet to the said Easterly line of Euclid Avenue; thence along said Easterly line South 10° 19' West 118 feet, more or less, more or less, to the point of beginning.
JPN: 063-02-282-07A
APN: 063-282-070
182
CONSENT ITEM 3.5
EAST PALO ALTO
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
DATE: July 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Melvin E. Gaines, City Manager
BY: Marissa Silva, Assistant City Clerk
SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Minutes
Recommendation
Adopt the July 7, 2026, City Council Meeting Minutes.
Attachments
1. July 7, 2026, Minutes
183
EAST PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES
Tuesday, July 7, 2026, 6:00 PM
EPA Government Center
2415 University Avenue, First Floor
East Palo Alto, CA 94303
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
Mayor Lincoln called the East Palo Alto City Council Special Meeting to order at 6:05 PM. City Clerk James Colin confirmed a quorum was present.
Attendee Name Title Status Arrived
Webster Lincoln Mayor Present
Ruben Abrica Vice Mayor Present
Carlos Romero Councilmember Present
Mark Dinan Councilmember Present
Martha Barragan Councilmember Present
(Remote)
2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Motion: Councilmember Dinan moved, Councilmember Romero seconded, to continue Item 6.1 (Climate Action Plan Implementation Report) to a future meeting. Motion carried unanimously (5- 0). Item 9.3 remained in its original order.
3. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR
Vice Mayor Arika pulled Item 3.8 for separate discussion. Public comments were received regarding Item 3.3 from Ravneel, Sisilia Finefeuiaki, and Gail Dixon.
Motion: Councilmember Romero moved; Councilmember Dinan seconded to approve the Consent Calendar, excluding Item 3.8. Motion carried unanimously.
3.8 City Anniversary Proclamation
Vice Mayor Abrica offered remarks recognizing the City's 43rd Anniversary of Incorporation.
Motion: Vice Mayor Abrica moved; Councilmember Romero seconded to approve the proclamation. Motion carried unanimously.
4. CLOSED SESSION
5. PUBLIC COMMENT
The following speakers provided public comments: Ariana Soria, Ravneel, Meda Okelo, Gail Dixon, Deborah Lewis-Virges, Mario, Michael Francois, Frances Gatson, Donna Rutherford, and Bernice Turner.
6. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS 184
6.1 Climate Action Plan Implementation Report
Item moved to future meeting.
7. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
8. POLICY AND ACTION
8.1 Measure HH Workforce Development Program Request for Proposals Staff presented the item. Following Council discussion, Council directed staff to bifurcate the RFP process.
Motion: Councilmember Romero moved, Vice Mayor Abrica seconded, to bifurcate the RFP and appropriate $300,000. Motion carried unanimously.
Public comment was heard from Gail Dixon.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS
9.1 Temporary Housing Development Incentive Program Ordinance Introduction Staff presented the item, and public comment was received. Council approved a limited exemption for projects of 20 units or fewer.
Motion: Councilmember Dinan moved; Councilmember Barragan seconded to introduce the ordinance as amended. Motion carried 3-2.
Motion: Mayor Lincoln moved, Vice Mayor Abrica seconded to amend the Street Level Advisors agreement. Motion carried unanimously.
Following public comment from Francisca Guzman, Laura Rubio, Sisilia Afungia, Deborah Lewis-Virges, Sharifa Wilson, Owen Byrd, Ravneel, Sarah Hoffmon, Daniel Ortiz, Michael Mashack, Larry Moody, Angelica, Roberto Arias, Roland Ghirdy, Antonia Almatan, Gail Dixon, Mario, Angah Miessi, Michael Francois, and Omowale, Satterwhite, Javanni Brown, Lourdes Best, and council discussion, no action was taken to introduce the ordinance.
9.2 General Obligation Bond Measure
Staff presented the proposed $125 million bond measure. Public comment was received.
Motion: Mayor Lincoln moved, Councilmember Dinan seconded to adopt the resolution and introduce the ordinance. Motion carried 4-1, with Councilmember Romero dissenting.
Public comment was heard from Javanni Brown, Ravneel, Fili, Mario
9.3 Sand Hill Development Agreement Amendment
Mayor Lincoln recused himself. Vice Mayor Abrica presided.
Motion: Councilmember Romero moved, and Councilmember Dinan seconded, to introduce the ordinance approving the First Amendment. Motion carried 4-0. 185
Public comment was heard from Gina Sudaria, Jayla Livingston, Rocia Valdovinos, Katia Kamangar, Ken Chen, Zoom User, Fili, Kim Chende, Ravneel, Leticia Martinez, Veronica Reyes, Teresa Morales, Oliver Santiago Mendez, Rhonda White, and Gail Dixon.
10. ADJOURN CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING AND RECONVENE TO THE EAST
PALO ALTO SANITARY DISTRICT
11. EPASD CONSENT CALENDAR
11.1 Award of Contract for EPASD design projects 1.1 and 1.2 Motion: Councilmember Romero moved, and Councilmember Barragan seconded to approve the EPASD Consent Calendar. Motion carried 4-0.
12. EPASD PUBLIC COMMENT
13. EPASD PUBLIC HEARING
13.1 Acceptance of East Palo Alto Sanitary District Sewer Capacity Fee Update Study and Adoption of Updated Sewer Capacity Fee
Staff presented the Sewer Capacity Fee Update Study.
Motion: Councilmember Dinan moved, and Councilmember Romero seconded to adopt the resolution approving the updated sewer capacity fee of $10,115 per EDU. Motion carried 4-0.
14. ADJOURN EAST PALO ALTO SANITARY DISTRICT MEETING AND RECONVENE
THE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
15. COUNCIL REPORTS
16. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Lincoln adjourned the meeting at 12:46 AM
186
INFORMATIONAL REPORT 6.2
EAST PALO ALTO
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
DATE: July 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Melvin E. Gaines, City Manager
BY: Regina Rubier, Interim Assistant to the City Manager Shiri Klima, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: City Council Strategic Priorities Fiscal Years (FY) 2025-27 Work Plan – Fourth Quarter Status Update
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council receive a fourth quarter update on the City Council Strategic Priorities FY 2025-27 Work Plan, ask clarifying questions, and provide feedback.
Executive Summary
This report provides an update on the City Council Strategic Priorities FY 2025–27 Work Plan, which outlines the projects and initiatives advancing the City Council’s adopted FY 2025–29 Strategic Priorities. The Work Plan serves as a roadmap for implementing the City Council’s strategic goals through coordinated, measurable actions across departments, ensuring continued alignment between City Council direction, community priorities, and City operations.
This update pertains to the fourth quarter (Q4) of the Work Plan, which began on April 1, 2026, and ended on June 30, 2026.
Alignment with City Council Strategic Plan
This recommendation is primarily aligned with:
Priority: Civic Engagement
Priority: Comprehensive Housing
Priority: Governance, Organizational Strength, and Fiscal Sustainability Priority: Land Use, Economic and Workforce Development
Priority: Parks, Recreation, and Community Facilities
Priority: Public Health, Safety, and Quality of Life
187
INFORMATIONAL REPORT 6.2
Priority: Public Infrastructure and Utilities
Background
On June 17, 2025, the City Council adopted its FY 2025-2029 Strategic Priorities and accompanying FY 2025-27 Work Plan, establishing a strategic framework with particular steps to guide the City’s policy direction, resource allocation, and program delivery. These documents represent a coordinated plan for addressing community needs and strengthening organizational capacity over the next several years. They are collectively available at www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/city_council/page/13631/epa_strategicpla n_7.1.25_final.pdf.
The Council Priorities serve as overarching focus areas that shape how the City directs its efforts and investments. They reflect the collective input of residents, stakeholders, and community leaders who participated in a robust engagement process in the spring of 2025 to identify East Palo Alto’s most critical challenges and opportunities. By defining clear priorities, the City Council provided policy direction to the City Manager and ensured staff remained focused on initiatives that advance community well-being and measurable results.
The Council Council’s Strategic Priorities for FY 2025 through FY 2029 are:
• Civic Engagement: Provide diverse and inclusive opportunities for all EPA community members to participate in City meetings, have a voice in City affairs, and develop leadership skills for EPA youth.
• Comprehensive Housing: Increase the City’s housing stock at all income levels (from affordable to market rate), facilitate pathways to homeownership, and prevent displacement of existing residents.
• Governance, Organizational Strength, and Fiscal Sustainability: Strengthen the City’s internal capacity, transparency, and long-term financial health by improving core operation, investing in workforce and systems, and implementing data-informed strategies to ensure effective service delivery, accountability, and fiscal resilience. • Land Use, Economic, and Workforce Development: Support balanced development that attracts investment, strengthens local businesses, reduces economic leakage, and expands access to quality jobs and services that meet local needs. • Parks, Recreation, and Community Facilities: Invest in the modernization and expansion of the City’s parks, recreation, and community facilities and services to increase residents’ access to open spaces and recreational opportunities. • Public Health, Safety, and Quality of Life: Implement and enforce strategies to ensure public safety, improve the livability of neighborhoods, and prepare the City for disasters and emergencies.
• Public Infrastructure and Utilities: Maintain, modernize, and expand the City’s physical infrastructure (streets, sidewalks, utilities) to support existing homes and businesses, and new development.
The FY 2025–2029 Strategic Priorities and FY 2025-27 Work Plan were refined in tandem and adopted together to ensure alignment between strategic goals and implementation activities. 188
INFORMATIONAL REPORT 6.2
While the Council Priorities establish the City’s long-term focus areas, the Work Plan translates those priorities into specific, actionable projects and programs that can be tracked and reported to the City Council and community.
The two-year work plan spreads project execution over fiscal years 2025-26 and 2026-27 based on staff capacity to undertake projects given existing workloads. This report and Attachment 1 provide an update on the City’s progress implementing the Work Plan from July 1, 2025, through June 30, 2026. Year two of the Work Plan implementation began July 1, 2026. While some projects were completed as of July 1, staff would not have capacity to undertake new projects without deferring or canceling existing projects planned for FY 2026-27.
Analysis
The FY 2025–27 Work Plan includes 59 projects, and the following table shows their statuses at the end of the fourth quarter.
Table 1: Project Status as of June 30, 2026
Project
Completion
Status
Not Yet
Scheduled
to Begin
Deferred
25%
Complete
50%
Complete
75%
Complete
100%
Complete
# of Projects
as of End of
Q2 (12/31/25) 2 4 25 12 12 4
# of Projects
as of End of
Q3 (3/31/26) 1 2 16 17 13 10
# of Projects
as of End of
Q4 (6/30/26) 0 2 13 19 10 15
At the close of Q4, of the 59 projects:
• 3% have been deferred (2 projects).
• 22% are a quarter complete (13 projects).
• 34% of the projects are half complete (19 projects).
• 17% are three-quarters complete (10 projects).
• 25% of the projects are completed (15 projects).
189
INFORMATIONAL REPORT 6.2
A total of 5 projects progressed to 100% completion during the fourth quarter; these projects are noted below with an asterisk (*). This brought the total number of completed projects from 10 at the end of Q3 to 15 at the end of Q4. Many completed projects require subsequent operational actions that require significant staff effort. The completed projects are:
1. Develop Recommendations for Youth Commission (CIV-1): The City Council approved establishing a youth commission and youth task force in January 2026. Staff are now working with consultants to launch and manage the commission and task force.
2. Complete Construction of 965 Weeks/Colibri Commons (CH-1): Staff completed final inspections and issued the final Certificate of Occupancy in December 2025, delivering 136 units of affordable housing.
3. Update the Zoning Code* (CH-8): In 2026, staff brought forth the Development Code Text Amendment to Planning Commission on March 23 and to the City Council on April 21 (first reading), May 5 (first reading continued), and June 2 (adoption). This Text Amendment addressed changes in site design, architectural standards, corner lot standards, refueling and service stations, setbacks of multi-family zones, tree removals, temporary use permits (TUPs), alcohol sales at eating establishments, conditional use permits (CUPs) for public and private schools, home occupations, and other areas.
4. Develop a Citywide Information Systems Master Plan* (GOV-4): Beginning in late 2025, staff worked with a consultant to draft a Citywide Information Systems Master Plan, which was adopted by the City Council on April 7, 2026. That plan lays out the current state of the City’s technological landscape and then creates a five-year implementation plan, which will be reviewed annually, to roll out various technological improvements.
5. Create an Economic Development Strategic Plan (LU-2): Complete. The strategic plan and implementation plans were approved by the City Council in Q3. Staff is now executing the Implementation Plan that the City Council approved March 17, 2026.
6. Construct Access Improvements at Rutgers Street/Bay Trail (PR-3): The Rutgers Street Bay Trail access improvements are complete, and the entrance is now open to the public.
7. Expand EPACENTER Services and Programs Through City Funding (PR-6): Staff executed a funding agreement with EPACENTER, and programming began in Fall 2025.Staff continues to manage the agreement which has a term through November 15, 2026. The City Council approved continued funding for this effort during the FY 2026-27 Budget Adoption, so staff will continue to oversee program implementation through FY 2026-27 and beyond (until the end of the amended contract term).
8. Expand Access to YMCA Programming and Services for the Greater East Palo Alto Community (PR-11): Staff executed a funding agreement with the YMCA, and programming began in Fall 2025.Staff continues to monitor the program. The agreement term goes through June 30, 2026. The City Council approved continued funding for this effort during the FY 2026-27 Budget Adoption, so staff will continue to oversee program implementation through FY 2026-27 and beyond (until the end of the amended contract term).
190
INFORMATIONAL REPORT 6.2
9. Expand Parking Enforcement Capacity (PH-1): The new service model with LAZ Parking was executed and went into effect in April 2026. Staff continues to oversee implementation of the program and actively monitor parking enforcement efforts.
10.Implement a Crime Data Analysis Platform for the Police Department* (PH-2): EPA PD staff have been coordinating with County staff to explore a countywide system as the City’s platform. Staff completed initial testing, implemented the software, and are now initiating training.
11.Update the Safety Element of the General Plan* (PH-9): The Safety and Noise Elements combined identify potential natural and human-caused hazards that could affect residents, businesses, infrastructure and public services. The purpose of the Safety Element is to establish a comprehensive framework that identifies and anticipates these hazards and prepares the community to minimize associated risks and impacts. After Plenning Commission recommended adoption by a vote of 7-0, the City Council adopted this Safety Element on June 2, 2026.
12.Construct Bicycle/Pedestrian Overcrossing at University Ave (PI-7): Construction is finished, and a ribbon-cutting was held in early Spring 2026.
13.Construct Full Trash Capture Devices to Meet Stormwater Compliance Requirements* (PI-8): The project launched in January 2026 and was completed in March 2026, successfully improving the City’s stormwater system and supporting compliance with applicable regulatory requirements.
14.Construct Mini Roundabouts on Pulgas Avenue (PI-9): Construction is finished, and a ribbon-cutting was held in early Spring 2026.
15.Develop Citywide Sewer Infrastructure Master Plan (PI-11): The EPASD Board adopted a sewer system master plan in July 2025. The Master Plan includes $77 million in projects. The Board/City Council authorized advancement of two projects in the current fiscal year.
As of the close of Q4, there are still 2 deferred projects. Public Health, Safety, and Quality of Life priority project PH-6: Maintain Senior/Disabled Emergency Contact Database (PH-6) was originally expected to begin during FY 2026-27 but was deferred until Fall of 2026. If advanced as scheduled, future updates will show this project as in progress.
Governance, Organizational Strength, and Fiscal Sustainability priority project GOV-5:
Implement a Centralized Grants Management System was also deferred during FY 2026-27.
This project is scoped as implementing a new software to manage both grants the City disseminates to nonprofit entities as well as grants the City obtains from federal, State, County, and private entities.
During the process to develop the Citywide Information Systems Master Plan, staff and the consultant determined that an optimal grants management system would be one that is integrated into, or compatible with, the City’s Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system (a system that integrates key organizational processes such as finance, human resources, procurement, etc.). The consultant who drafted the Citywide Information Systems Master Plan 191
INFORMATIONAL REPORT 6.2
recommended the City evaluate its current ERP in FY 2026-27 and potentially roll out a new ERP (if we need one) in FY 2027-28. Because the grants management software would either be a part of or linked to the City’s ERP, the City should complete review of, and potential movement from, the existing ERP prior to implementing a new grants management system.
Thus, staff have deferred implementation of a centralized grants management system. However, the need for better grants management in the interim persists. A cross-departmental team of City staff recently engaged in Pause for Change, a methodology to address challenges more effectively, using fewer resources while achieving greater results. One of the Pause for Change challenges was focused on improving the City's approach to grants management. This team presented preliminary ideas at the end of Fiscal Year 2025-26 and are expected to present final recommendations for improving grants management without a robust new technology during the first quarter of FY 2026-27.
Next Steps
Staff will proceed to work on the pending strategic priority projects and will provide a progress update on the fifth quarter implementation (or the first quarter implementation in the second year) of the FY 2025-27 Work Plan in October 2026.
Fiscal Impact
There is no fiscal impact for this item.
Public Notice
The public was provided notice by making the agenda and report available on the City’s website and on a bulletin board located at City Hall: 2415 University Avenue, East Palo Alto.
Environmental
The action being considered does not constitute a “Project” within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to CEQA Guideline section 15378 (b)(5), in that it is a government administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect changes in the environment.
Government Code § 84308
Applicability of Levine Act: No, as this item does not entail an entitlement.
Analysis of Levine Act Compliance: Not applicable.
Attachments
1. Council Strategic Priorities Work Plan Update April 1, 2026, through June 30, 2026 192
FY 2025–27 Strategic Priorities Work Plan Projects — Q4 Update GOAL
CIV-1
PROJECT NAME
Develop
Recommendations for
Establishing a Youth
Commission or
Alternative Youth Civic
Engagement Program
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's
Office
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
3/31/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
100
PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Complete
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
GOAL
CIV-2
PROJECT NAME
Implement Sister City
and Cultural Exchange
Initiative
DEPARTMENT
City Clerk
PROJECT
START
7/1/2026
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2027
Q4 % COMPLETE
75 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Progressed
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Staff prepared for the Tongan Delegation by finalizing reception logistics, coordinating with community and cultural organizations, and developing commemorative materials. The delegation arrived on May 6 and participated in a welcoming dinner, followed by formal events from May 10–15. An opening ceremony was held on May 11, and the formal signing occurred on May 15. Throughout the visit, the delegation met with community partners including JobTrain, Ravenswood City School District, StreetCode Academy, Amazon, and regional partners including Meta and Google. Staff are now coordinating with the delegation to schedule a follow-up visit to Tonga.
193
GOAL
CH-1
PROJECT NAME
Complete
Construction of 965
Weeks/Colibri
Commons
DEPARTMENT
Community and
Economic
Development
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
9/30/2025
Q4 % COMPLETE
100
PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Complete
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
On May 20, 2026, Community partners and public and private-sector stakeholders came together for a ribbon cutting to celebrate the grand opening of the Colibri Commons.
GOAL
CH-2
PROJECT NAME
Develop and Launch
Home Repair Program
DEPARTMENT
Community and
Economic
Development
PROJECT
START
4/1/2026
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2027
Q4 % COMPLETE
50 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
The City approved $800,000 for home repair programs during the July 23, 2026 budget approval process. Staff finalized the Major Home Repairs Program guidelines and will present them to City Council for approval on July 21, 2026. For the Minor Home Repairs Program, the project is currently estimated at 50% completion because funding is expected to begin July 1, 2026. In early 2026, the County led a competitive selection process for a nonprofit provider, with City staff participating in the evaluation. Climate Resilient Communities (CRC) was selected to administer the program, including homeowner applications, eligibility verification, cost estimates, construction coordination, and compliance monitoring. The County will oversee reimbursements and program compliance. The County completed program guidelines, public outreach, and coordination with CRC, including a June 3, 2026 kickoff meeting. Staff expects strong demand and anticipates that all available funds will be used to support essential home repairs, improve housing safety, and assist vulnerable residents. The Minor Home Repairs item will also be presented at the July 21 City Council meeting. 194
GOAL
CH-3
PROJECT NAME
Establish Rent Registry
for Both RentStabilized and MarketRate Rental Units
DEPARTMENT
Community and
Economic
Development
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
3/31/2027
Q4 % COMPLETE
25 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
This project experienced significant delay from the transition to new software. Staff now has a new workplan with Tolemi and rental registration for rentstabilized units is expected to be able to work in the new software by Thanksgiving. From there, we will roll out additional functions, such as rent increases, changes in tenancy, notices of termination and landlord and tenant petitions. Once these functions all work, Tolemi will turn to market-rate rental units.
GOAL
CH-4
PROJECT NAME
Research Feasibility of
a Financial
Empowerment and
Foreclosure
Prevention Program
DEPARTMENT
Community and
Economic
Development
PROJECT
START
1/1/2026
PROJECT
FINISH
9/30/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
75 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Following the City Council’s approval of funding and contract authorization, staff issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) to identify qualified service providers for foreclosure prevention services. After completing the procurement process, staff launched the Pilot Foreclosure Prevention Program to provide resources and assistance to homeowners at risk of foreclosure. The pilot is intended to evaluate the effectiveness of foreclosure prevention strategies, assess community needs, and measure program outcomes. Staff will provide the City Council with a comprehensive update on the program’s first-year performance, including key outcomes, challenges, and recommendations for future implementation, in Fall 2026 (anticipated in November 2026 or earlier, if available). On May 5, 2026, staff presented first time homebuyer research, and within that, the potential design of homebuyer education and counseling that supports prospective homebuyers to navigate the complex home purchasing process and connect them with existing financing tools, including workshops covering budgeting, credit readiness, mortgage products, and the purpose process, one-on-one counseling to assess readiness and identify appropriate loan programs, and more, with the goal of preventing foreclosures by bolstering homebuying education. 195
GOAL
CH-5
PROJECT NAME
Research Feasibility of
a First-Time
Homebuyer Assistance
Program
DEPARTMENT
Community and
Economic
Development
PROJECT
START
10/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
9/30/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
75 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Progressed
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
At the May 5, 2026, City Council meeting, staff presented research on the feasibility of establishing first-time homebuyer assistance programs, as directed by the City Council. The research included an overview of potential program models, funding considerations, and best practices from other jurisdictions. This initial research phase has been completed. Following the presentation, the City Council directed staff to conduct additional research and develop more detailed recommendations regarding program design, implementation, staffing requirements, and funding needs. Staff will return to the City Council with program proposals and associated cost estimates in November 2026, or earlier if the work is completed ahead of schedule. For Strategic Plan reporting purposes, staff recommends one of the following approaches: Option 1: Mark this Strategic Priority as 100% complete, as the original Council direction to research the feasibility of first-time homebuyer programs has been fulfilled and establish a new Strategic Plan action item to capture the additional work directed by the City Council. Option 2: Mark this Strategic Priority as 50% complete, reflecting that while the feasibility research has been completed, staff is still developing detailed program recommendations for future Council consideration. The additional research and program development will evaluate the following potential first-time homebuyer assistance initiatives: Homebuyer education and counseling programs. Mortgage interest rate reduction or buydown assistance (of particular interest to Councilmember Lincoln). Closing cost assistance programs. Down payment assistance for Below Market Rate (BMR) housing units (of particular interest to Councilmember Lincoln). Opportunities to partner with or incorporate Community Land Trusts into affordable homeownership strategies (of particular interest to Councilmember Romero). Partnership opportunities with external agencies and organizations to leverage and pool funding resources for first-time homebuyer assistance programs.
GOAL
CH-6
PROJECT NAME
Research Feasibility of
a Residential Rental
Inspection Program
DEPARTMENT
Community and
Economic
Development
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
25 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
An initial draft framework has been developed, supported by preliminary research on comparable program models and funding approaches. Next steps including refinement of the analysis and confirmation of timing for City Council consideration. 196
GOAL
CH-7
PROJECT NAME
Update the
Inclusionary Housing
Ordinance
DEPARTMENT
Community and
Economic
Development
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2027
Q4 % COMPLETE
50 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Progressed
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Staff along with the consultant drafted Temporary Housing Development Incentive Program (THDIP). Staff and the consultant prepared the staff report and presentation of the draft THDIP and held the first public hearing.
GOAL
CH-8
PROJECT NAME
Update the Zoning
Code
DEPARTMENT
Community and
Economic
Development
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
100
PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Complete
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Adopted the new Zoning Code with a second reading at the June 2, 2026 City Council meeting. 197
GOAL
GOV-1
PROJECT NAME
Collaborate with the
SMC Libraries to
Identify and
Implement a
Comprehensive
Funding Strategy for
Library
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's
Office
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2027
Q4 % COMPLETE
50 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
During Q4, the City advanced planning and funding strategy efforts for the new Civic Center facility. Arctec is currently working on the project, which involves revisions to a previously approved and entitled development. Staff has provided Arctec with the complete list of applicable template conditions, and they are currently reviewing these requirements as part of the design process. The project design is expected to take approximately five to six months to complete, during which the plans will be refined and updated to ensure they comply with all applicable conditions and project requirements before moving forward to the next phase. The project team is advancing site and entitlement planning activities through the summer, with internal layout and programming anticipated to begin in late summer in coordination with project partners. Progress continues to depend on alignment of funding, design, and stakeholder coordination, with increased momentum across both fundraising and planning efforts.
GOAL
GOV-2
PROJECT NAME
Conduct Council Term
Limit Policy Research
DEPARTMENT
City Clerk
PROJECT
START
10/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
9/30/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
75 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Progressed
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Staff conducted substantive research, prepared a staff report, and presented at the City Council meetings on March 3, March 5 and May 12. The City Council approved a resolution to place this ballot measure on the November 2026 election. Next, staff will need to work with the County to place the measure on the November ballot.
198
GOAL
GOV-3
PROJECT NAME
Develop a 10-Year
Fiscal Strategy and
Address the Structural
Deficit
DEPARTMENT
Finance
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
3/31/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
25 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
We have selected a consultant and completed the project kick-off meeting. During the meeting, the consultant provided a list of data and information needed to begin the analysis. Staff is currently compiling the requested information so the consultant can proceed with the development of the long-term fiscal strategy.
GOAL
GOV-4
PROJECT NAME
Develop a Citywide
Information Systems
Master Plan
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's
Office
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
100
PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Complete
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
The completed plan was presented to and approved by the City Council on April 7, 2026.
GOAL
GOV-5
PROJECT NAME
Implement a
Centralized Grants
Management System
DEPARTMENT
Finance
PROJECT
START
7/1/2026
PROJECT
FINISH
12/31/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
Deferred
PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Deferred
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
This software rollout is scheduled in the IT Strategic Plan for FY 28-29. 199
GOAL
GOV-6
PROJECT NAME
Prepare 2026 Ballot
Measure to Raise
Revenue for
Infrastructure
Improvements and
Public Facilities
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's
Office
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
12/31/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
75 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Progressed
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
In April through June we prepared the staff report for the City Council to take action to place the initiative on the ballot, set up educational sessions about the ballot measure, set up the vehicle for donating funds, and prepared educational materials.
GOAL
GOV-7
PROJECT NAME
Update the City’s
Personnel Policies and
Procedures
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's
Office
PROJECT
START
1/1/2026
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2027
Q4 % COMPLETE
25 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Outside Counsel has completed preliminary legal review of prior version of the Personnel Policies and Procedures. Next, we are drafting new policies and procedures to address issues not in the prior version of the PPPs; this will go to City Manager's review in the winter.
GOAL
GOV-8
PROJECT NAME
Upgrade and Launch
New City Website
DEPARTMENT
City Clerk
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2027
Q4 % COMPLETE
25 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Progress has been impacted by staffing constraints and shifting departmental priorities, including increased scope for the Sister Cities initiative and lack of key administrative staff members (Front Desk Assistant and Executive Assistant). Staff continue to conduct preliminary research, including analytics review and an inventory scan of the current website.
200
GOAL
LU-1
PROJECT NAME
Conclude Measure HH
Pilot Evaluation and
Initiate Ongoing
Workforce
Development Program
DEPARTMENT
Community and
Economic
Development
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2027
Q4 % COMPLETE
75 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Received Council approval of $1,100,000 funding allocation in Measure HH funds. Staff finalized the draft Request for Proposals (RFP) for the program. At its July 7, 2027, meeting, the City Council directed staff to proceed only with the procurement of the Master Contractor and Program Evaluator through the RFP process. The Council also directed staff to return with additional analysis and recommendations regarding the proposed training programs before moving forward with that component of the initiative. Staff will incorporate Council's feedback into the analysis and return with recommendations for Council's consideration at a future meeting.
GOAL
LU-2
PROJECT NAME
Create an Economic
Development Strategic
Plan Focusing on
Small and Micro
Businesses
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's
Office
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
12/31/2025
Q4 % COMPLETE
100
PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Complete
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Staff developed a work plan and began implementation in partnership with Brian Moura from RGS. Early implementation efforts include launching the sidewalk vending application process, strengthening relationships with local businesses and regional partners along the San Francisco Peninsula, and promoting events to broaden outreach. Staff also created a new business e newsletter, “The Business Pulse,” with the first edition scheduled for distribution in July. An RFP to support implementation of the EDSP is currently being drafted and is expected to be released in July. 201
GOAL
LU-3
PROJECT NAME
Design and Implement
a “Pop-Up”/Sidewalk
Vending Policy and
Program
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's
Office
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
12/31/2025
Q4 % COMPLETE
75 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
The ordinance and staff report were included on the April 21 City Council consent calendar and were unanimously approved. Staff continues vendor outreach and internal coordination to finalize the administrative process for vendor applications and citations. Staff also created a public-facing website to provide resources and guidance for interested vendors and will be published in July.
GOAL
LU-4
PROJECT NAME
Implement Program to
Distribute Community
Resource Funds Grants
for Small Business
Assistance
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's
Office
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
12/31/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
50 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Progressed
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Staff evaluated small business assistance contract, developed guidelines and presented to the City Manager.
GOAL
LU-5
PROJECT NAME
Renovate the
Cummings Loft
Property into a Small
Business Incubator
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
9/30/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
50 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Construction kick-off held in April and construction started in May. 202
GOAL
PR-1
PROJECT NAME
Complete
Construction of Tenant
Improvements at City
Facilities
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
9/30/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
75 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Construction and change order items completed. Started construction close out.
GOAL
PR-2
PROJECT NAME
Conduct a
Comprehensive
Evaluation of Senior
Service Agreements in
East Palo Alto
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's
Office
PROJECT
START
10/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
12/31/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
50 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
With all community engagement activities now complete, the consultant is in the process of compiling and analyzing the feedback received throughout the outreach effort. This information will be incorporated into a comprehensive report that summarizes the community's input, key findings, and recommendations.
The final report is expected to be presented to the City Council in early winter, where it will help inform future discussions and decision-making.
GOAL
PR-3
PROJECT NAME
Construct Access
Improvements at
Rutgers Street
Entrance to the Bay
Trail
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
12/31/2025
Q4 % COMPLETE
100
PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Complete
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
The City and Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District held the ribbon cutting for the Rutgers Street Entrance on Saturday, April 4, 2026. 203
GOAL
PR-4
PROJECT NAME
Create a Pilot Dog
Park
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's
Office
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
9/30/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
50 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Progressed
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
The Building Division approved the permit for the Pilot Dog Park on June 30. With the permitting process complete, the project will move into the construction procurement phase. The next steps include preparing and issuing a request for bids, evaluating proposals, selecting a qualified contractor, and completing the contracting process. This phase is anticipated to take approximately two to three months, after which construction can be scheduled to begin.
GOAL
PR-5
PROJECT NAME
Establish a Joint Use
Agreement with RCSD
for Shared Recreation
Sites
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's
Office
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
25 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Progressed
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Staff continues to work collaboratively with the Ravenswood City School District (RCSD) to finalize a mutually agreed-upon schedule and timeline for implementation of the proposed joint use agreement. Both parties remain committed to reaching an agreement and are actively engaged in discussions to address scheduling and operational considerations. Staff will continue coordinating with RCSD and will provide updates as progress is made toward finalizing the agreement and establishing a launch timeline
GOAL
PR-6
PROJECT NAME
Expand EPACENTER
Services and Programs
Through City Funding
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's
Office
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2027
Q4 % COMPLETE
100
PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Complete
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
204
GOAL
PR-7
PROJECT NAME
Finalize Architectural
Design for the New
East Palo Alto Library
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
12/31/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
50 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Progressed
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
In April, the City Council awarded the contract for the architectural design of the overall Civic Center. The library is now incorporated into the Civic Center project design, and coordination is underway to advance the integrated design process.
GOAL
PR-8
PROJECT NAME
Implement Priority
Projects from the
Parks, Recreation and
Open Space Master
Plan
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2027
Q4 % COMPLETE
50 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
All projects have advanced into various stages of the completion process. While each project is at a different point depending on its scope and remaining tasks, all are progressing toward final closeout. Staff continues to monitor each project to ensure outstanding items are completed in a timely manner and that all necessary documentation, inspections, and administrative requirements are finalized before project closeout. Cooley Landing AV Upgrades: The bidding process has been completed, and the project is currently awaiting completion of the contract approval process. Stadium/Field Lighting: Plans have been approved by the Building Division, and the project is currently in the contracting phase with the City Attorney’s Office. Park Lighting & Cameras: Staff is proposing a phased implementation approach beginning with Bell Street Park and Jack Farrell Park, based on their alignment with the findings and priorities identified in the Citywide Lighting Assessment. Martin Luther King Jr. Park will be the next phase, followed by Joel Davis Park. This phased approach will allow staff to prioritize locations while coordinating resources and implementation timelines effectively.
GOAL
PR-9
PROJECT NAME
Negotiate with County
to Finalize Acquisition
of Beech Street
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's
Office
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
12/31/2025
Q4 % COMPLETE
75 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Staff continue to work on real property transfer agreement(s). 205
GOAL
PR-10
PROJECT NAME
Plan for Development
of New Civic Center
Facility
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's
Office
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
12/31/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
50 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
During Q4, the City advanced planning and funding strategy efforts for the new Civic Center facility. Fundraising outreach continued, including engagement with philanthropic partners and major donors. Staff are also preparing for additional donor engagement focused on institutional investors. Arctec is currently working on the project, which involves revisions to a previously approved and entitled development. We have provided the team with the complete list of applicable template conditions, and they are currently reviewing these requirements as part of the design process. The project design is expected to take approximately five to six months to complete, during which the plans will be refined and updated to ensure they comply with all applicable conditions and project requirements before moving forward to the next phase. The project team is advancing site and entitlement planning activities through the summer, with internal layout and programming anticipated to begin in late summer in coordination with project partners. Progress continues to depend on alignment of funding, design, and stakeholder coordination, with increased momentum across both fundraising and planning efforts.
GOAL
PR-11
PROJECT NAME
Expand Access to
YMCA Programming
and Services for the
Greater East Palo Alto
Community
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's
Office
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2027
Q4 % COMPLETE
100
PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Complete
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
GOAL
PH-1
PROJECT NAME
Expand Parking
Enforcement Capacity
DEPARTMENT
Police
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
12/31/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
100
PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Complete
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Public education started April 1, with enforcement beginning April 15. City Council received an update from Chief Liu and the LAZ parking enforcement supervisor during the June 16, 2026, meeting. This project is now complete. 206
GOAL
PH-2
PROJECT NAME
Implement a Crime
Data Analytics
Platform for the Police
Department
DEPARTMENT
Police
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2027
Q4 % COMPLETE
100
PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Complete
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Police Department staff have been coordinating with the County of San Mateo to explore the countywide system, Peregrine, as the City’s platform. In March, the County approved the City’s use of the system, and staff completed initial testing to confirm its suitability. The onboarding process was finalized in May. This month, staff will identify power users for early training prior to department-wide training. This project is now considered complete, as onboarding is finished and training is underway.
GOAL
PH-3
PROJECT NAME
Implement a Shopping
Cart Abatement
Program
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's
Office
PROJECT
START
1/1/2026
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2027
Q4 % COMPLETE
25 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
This program is currently on hold due to limited staff capacity. Staff will resume work in FY 2026-2027 quarter 1 with best practice research, ordinance development, and business outreach.
207
GOAL
PH-4
PROJECT NAME
Launch a Residential
Parking Permit
Program
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
12/31/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
50 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
The Engineering team is continuing to make steady progress in preparing the Project Request for Proposals (RFP). Staff are currently finalizing the scope of work, technical requirements, and procurement documentation to ensure the RFP clearly defines the project objectives and expectations for prospective consultants. Based on the current project schedule, the Engineering team anticipates completing and releasing the RFP by July 31, 2026. Once finalized, the procurement process will advance to the solicitation and evaluation phase, allowing qualified firms to submit proposals for consideration. The Ordinance was adopted in spring 2026, establishing the framework for the required follow-up investigation. In accordance with the implementation schedule, the follow-up investigation RFP was issued in June 2026 to solicit qualified consulting firms with the necessary technical expertise. Staff will evaluate the proposals based on the established selection criteria, including qualifications, technical approach, experience, and cost. Following completion of the evaluation process and the conclusion of the City Council's summer recess, staff anticipates returning to the City Council in September 2026 with a recommendation to award the contract and authorize the selected consultant to begin work.
GOAL
PH-5
PROJECT NAME
Launch Emergency
Preparedness Program
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's
Office
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2027
Q4 % COMPLETE
50 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Progressed
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Staff identified and purchased supplies for the Emergency Operations Center. The City partnered with Youth Community Services, rEPAct, Thrive Alliance, and Menlo Fire to plan a community emergency preparedness workshop and purchased emergency kits for attendees. The community emergency preparedness workshop was held on June 5, with 35 participants representing more than 100 household members. An earthquake tabletop exercise for executive staff was conducted on June 4, resulting in useful feedback and identified areas for improvement. The City launched its first emergency preparation campaign, providing residents with preparedness magnets outlining key steps to take. Magnets were distributed at the emergency preparedness workshop and at a community event in June.
208
GOAL
PH-6
PROJECT NAME
Maintain
Senior/Disabled
Individuals’ Emergency
Contact Database
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's
Office
PROJECT
START
1/1/2026
PROJECT
FINISH
12/31/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
Deferred
PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Deferred
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
GOAL
PH-7
PROJECT NAME
Strengthen the Clean
City Program to
Reduce Illegal
Dumping
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
9/30/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
75 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
In April, the City helped organize a multi-jurisdictional Earth Day event where environmental items were discussed. The Earth Day event was on April 25th and included environmental education exhibits and local organizations that conducted outreach and provided attendees with resources and information related to waste reduction. In May, the City organized an e-waste event and a "Fix It" event. In June, the City received a clean-up grant for 6 creek/right-of-way clean ups over the next six months.
GOAL
PH-8
PROJECT NAME
Update the
Environmental Justice
Element of the
General Plan
DEPARTMENT
Community and
Economic
Development
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
50 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Presented Draft Element to Planning Commission and City Council. Staff is currently reviewing the draft EJ Element at staff level and anticipate going to Council by October 2026.
209
GOAL
PH-9
PROJECT NAME
Update the Safety
Element of the
General Plan
DEPARTMENT
Community and
Economic
Development
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
100
PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Complete
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
On June 2, 2026, the City Council adopted the General Plan Element Update.
GOAL
PI-1
PROJECT NAME
Assess Utility
Operations and
Prepare Transition Plan
for Post-Lease
Operations
DEPARTMENT
City Manager's
Office
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2027
Q4 % COMPLETE
25 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Negotiated 3-year water lease amendment and restatement with Veolia. The City Council approved this on June 9, 2026, and then staff executed the document.
Next, staff will draft an RFP for a financial assessment of bringing water operations in-house to determine feasibility of that option.
GOAL
PI-2
PROJECT NAME
Build Sidewalk and
Pedestrian Safety
Improvements on East
Bayshore Road
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
9/30/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
50 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Continued with underground utility work, sidewalk installation on East Bayshore from Euclid to Menalto. Construction continues. 210
GOAL
PI-3
PROJECT NAME
Collaborate with City
of Palo Alto to Replace
the Newell Street
Bridge
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2027
Q4 % COMPLETE
50 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
The Newell Road/San Francisquito Creek Bridge Project is replacing the obsolete Newell Road Bridge, originally constructed in 1911, with a new 80-foot-long,
42.5-foot-wide bridge at the existing location. The new bridge will improve safety and accessibility by providing two travel lanes, shoulders, sidewalks, and upgraded bridge barriers. Construction began in May 2026, with project completion anticipated in Spring 2027.
GOAL
PI-4
PROJECT NAME
Collaborate with
SFCJPA to Construct
San Francisquito Creek
Flood Protection
Upgrades
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2027
Q4 % COMPLETE
25 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
SFCJPA design study, design development and subsequent construction to last approximately 3-5 years.
GOAL
PI-5
PROJECT NAME
Collaborate with
SFCJPA to Implement
the SAFER Bay Project
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2027
Q4 % COMPLETE
50 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
60% design development. Negotiate a contract for north of Bay Road levee design. 211
GOAL
PI-6
PROJECT NAME
Conduct a Siting Study
to Identify Locations
for Additional Water
Storage Tanks
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
3/31/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
50 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Study development continues; and the study is anticipated to be presented to City Council on July 21, 2026. The schedule reflects the level of analysis required to ensure proposed sites appropriately support long-term emergency preparedness and drought resilience objectives.
GOAL
PI-7
PROJECT NAME
Construct a Bicycle
and Pedestrian
Overcrossing on
University Avenue at
US 101
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
3/31/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
100
PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Complete
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
The project team is currently finalizing grant reimbursement documentation and completing minor administrative closeout items. The Notice of Completion is pending final review and signature. These remaining activities are procedural in nature.
GOAL
PI-8
PROJECT NAME
Construct Full Trash
Capture Devices to
Meet Stormwater
Compliance
Requirements
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
3/31/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
100
PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Complete
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Construction of the full trash capture device at Newbridge Street required to meet stormwater compliance requirements has been completed. The project began in January 2026 and was completed in March 2026, successfully improving the City's stormwater system and supporting compliance with applicable regulatory requirements.
212
GOAL
PI-9
PROJECT NAME
Construct Mini
Roundabouts to
Replace Temporary
Traffic Circles on
Pulgas Avenue
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
100
PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Complete
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
GOAL
PI-10
PROJECT NAME
Create a Financing
Strategy for Water
Infrastructure
Upgrades
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
PROJECT
START
10/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
12/31/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
25 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
A project kick-off meeting was held with the consultant to review the project scope, objectives, and anticipated schedule. During the discussion, it was recognized that portions of the project could overlap with public discussions related to the upcoming November General Obligation (GO) bond measure.
Because the project may involve evaluating potential water rate adjustments, staff and the consultant mutually agreed to defer substantive project work until after the election to avoid introducing discussions that could be perceived as related to, or influence, the GO bond measure. Deferring this work will allow the City to maintain a clear separation between the project and the election process while minimizing the potential for confusion among stakeholders and the public. The project will resume following the election in accordance with the revised schedule.
GOAL
PI-11
PROJECT NAME
Design Roadway
Improvements on
Woodland Avenue
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2027
Q4 % COMPLETE
25 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Executed grant, design agreement underway and drafted the RFP scheduled to be released in July 2026. 213
GOAL
PI-12
PROJECT NAME
Develop an Asset
Management
Database
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
9/30/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
25 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Working with vendor on contract execution and scope of work.
GOAL
PI-13
PROJECT NAME
Develop Citywide
Sewer Infrastructure
Master Plan
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
100
PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Complete
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
GOAL
PI-14
PROJECT NAME
Install Citywide
Lighting
Improvements – Phase
II
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
PROJECT
START
7/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2027
Q4 % COMPLETE
50 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Progressed
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
General Lighting Services, Inc. initially submitted a proposal for the project, which was reviewed by Engineering staff and selected based on its alignment with the City's needs, objectives, and project requirements. Following selection, Engineering staff and General Lighting Services, Inc. discussed project goals, requirements, and expectations to clarify the scope of work and address any questions or areas requiring additional consideration. Through these coordination efforts, the project scope and technical requirements were refined to ensure the proposed services met the City's needs. The Notice to Proceed was executed on May 1, 2026, formally authorizing General Lighting Services, Inc. to begin work. Since project initiation, Engineering staff and General Lighting Services, Inc. have continued regular coordination to review progress, exchange information, discuss findings, and address questions as they arise. General Lighting Services, Inc. is continuing its evaluation efforts in accordance with the City's project objectives. 214
GOAL
PI-15
PROJECT NAME
Install New Traffic
Signal and Complete
Safety Upgrades on
University Avenue at
Runnymede
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
PROJECT
START
10/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
9/30/2026
Q4 % COMPLETE
25 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Reviewed construction submittals, ordered materials and currently experiencing construction delays related to material procurement.
GOAL
PI-16
PROJECT NAME
Modernize Equipment
and Complete
Rehabilitation of the
O’Connor Pump
Station
DEPARTMENT
Public Works
PROJECT
START
10/1/2025
PROJECT
FINISH
6/30/2027
Q4 % COMPLETE
50 PROJECT PROGRESS FROM Q3 TO Q4
Continuing as Planned
Q4 STATUS UPDATE:
Continuing with Phase 1 design.
215
PUBLIC HEARING 8.1
EAST PALO ALTO
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
DATE: July 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Melvin E. Gaines, City Manager
BY: Shiri Klima, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance Ordering Submission to the Voters, and Adoption of a Resolution Calling and Requesting Consolidation of an Election, on a $125,000,000 General Obligation Bond Measure for Civic, Recreational, Water, and Stormwater Improvements at the November 3, 2026, Consolidated General Election Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council take the following actions:
1. Waive the second reading and adopt an ordinance ordering the submission to the qualified voters of the City, at the November 3, 2026, consolidated general election of a proposition authorizing the City to incur general obligation bonded indebtedness in a principal amount not to exceed $125,000,000; and
2. Adopt a resolution calling the election, requesting consolidation with the statewide general election conducted by the County of San Mateo, approving the form of the abbreviated ballot question, establishing the schedule and procedures for arguments, rebuttals, and the impartial analysis, and authorizing and directing the filing of the Tax Rate Statement and all other documents and actions necessary to place the measure on the ballot.
Alignment with City Council Strategic Plan
This recommendation is primarily aligned with:
Priority: Governance, Organizational Strength, and Fiscal Sustainability Priority: Parks, Recreation, and Community Facilities
Priority: Public Health, Safety, and Quality of Life
Priority: Public Infrastructure and Utilities
216
PUBLIC HEARING 8.1
Executive Summary
On July 7, 2026, the City Council adopted the Resolution Determining Necessity (by a two-thirds vote) and introduced an ordinance ordering the submission to the voters of a $125,000,000 general obligation (GO) bond measure for the November 3, 2026, consolidated general election.
This item completes that process.
Staff recommends that the Council waive the second reading and adopt the ordinance (also by two-thirds vote) and adopt the Resolution Calling the Election and Requesting Consolidation with the County of San Mateo (by simple majority). As noted earlier, the bonds would finance a single, unified program of municipal public improvements: a civic center (including a public library where kids and teens can go safely, city offices, a separate police department facility with an Emergency Command Center, a community park with track and field), and water and stormwater system infrastructure.
The measure must be approved by two-thirds of the voters voting on it. If approved, debt service would be repaid solely from a property tax estimated to average $105.26 per $100,000 of assessed value; the general obligation bonds would not obligate the General Fund.
The proposed bond measure is one component of the City's overall financing plan for the Civic Center. The estimated total project cost is approximately $170,000,000, consisting of approximately $120,000,000 for the main building (Library, city offices, community spaces), $20,000,000 for the police department with Emergency Command Center, and $30,000,000 for the park with track and field. (The remaining $35,000,000 of the bond measure funds would be allocated to water and stormwater infrastructure.)
The City anticipates that approximately ten acres on Pulgas Avenue (combined estimated value of approximately $29,000,000) will be donated, and the City is pursuing approximately $21,000,000 in additional private contributions and approximately $10,000,000 in local, State and federal grants. A donation agreement for the land is currently in negotiation and drafting phase, and as such a draft agreement cannot be disclosed at this juncture. Various donors have pledged funds to the project, and the City is receiving contributions through a fund at the Silicon Valley Community Foundation. Neither the bonds nor the improvements are contingent on those donations or grants.
As it currently stands, staff's financing plan for the Civic Center contemplates funding these improvements from multiple sources, including $90,000,000 in GO bonds, roughly $29,000,000 (estimated by donor) in donated land, approximately $21,000,000 in anticipated private donations, and a $20,000,000 General Fund commitment previously included in the City's budget. Staff continues to pursue private donations and grant opportunities. The City Council may also appropriate additional funds from the General Fund Reserve or other sources.
Bond proceeds will also be used to fund infrastructure improvements. GO bonds will be used to directly fund or supplement grant funds that partially cover Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) projects. Staff continues to explore grants and other financing opportunities for infrastructure 217
PUBLIC HEARING 8.1
projects. These financing plans will continue to be refined as the projects advance.
The proposed improvements, including construction of a new library, Emergency Command Center, and water and stormwater system infrastructure projects, will address earthquake safety by providing modern, resilient facilities and infrastructure that better protect the health and safety of City residents, employees, and visitors in the event of an earthquake, in addition to having the infrastructure to respond to earthquake events.
Background
Through engagement efforts, including EPATalks, the City has heard plenty of concerns articulated about our public library as it is dated and often cramped. Additionally, in a recent survey, East Palo Alto residents identified the following as five of their top City priorities (not necessarily in this order):
Providing safe and clean drinking water.
Providing safe places for children and teens.
Replacing deteriorating pipes that distribute drinking water. Providing an Emergency Operations Center ensuring a safe space in East Palo Alto no matter the emergency.
Repairing aging storm drains to prevent flooding on City streets.
The State has also articulated concerns about the City’s water storage capacity, particularly in the case of an emergency.
The City has identified significant long-term capital needs that cannot be funded within its annual operating budget or reserves. This includes the replacement and expansion of public-safety and civic facilities, parks and recreation facilities, and water and stormwater infrastructure projects.
Currently, the City has a unique opportunity to receive an estimated $50 million in private land and cash donations to construct the Civic Center; however, the City must raise funds to finance the remainder of the estimated $170 million project. Additionally, the City has over $100 million in infrastructure projects in its CIP and aims to use $35 million in General Obligation (GO) bonds to advance drinking water and storm water projects. The bond proceeds will be paired with grant funds and loans as part of the City’s larger infrastructure financing strategy to fund water and storm drain improvement projects from the CIP.
General obligation bonds—repaid through a voter-approved ad valorem property tax—are a customary method for California cities to finance the acquisition and improvement of real property for these purposes.
As a general law city, East Palo Alto is authorized to issue general obligation bonds under the Municipal Improvement Act of 1901 (Government Code sections 43600 et seq.) and, as an additional and alternative method, under Article 4.5 (Government Code sections 53506 et seq.).
The California Constitution permits the City to incur such indebtedness, and to levy the ad valorem tax to repay it, only with the assent of two-thirds of the voters voting on the proposition (Cal. Const. art. XVI, § 18; art. XIII A, § 1(b)).
218
PUBLIC HEARING 8.1
Issuing general obligation bonds requires a sequence of legislative actions before the measure may be placed on the ballot. At its July 7, 2026, meeting, the City Council adopted, by a twothirds vote, the resolution determining that the public interest and necessity demand the improvements and their financing and introduced the ordinance ordering submission of the proposition. The remaining steps—the second reading and adoption of the ordinance, and the adoption of the resolution calling and requesting consolidation of the election—are before the Council with this item.
Staff proposes placing the measure on the November 3, 2026, consolidated general election conducted by San Mateo County. The certified election documents must be received by the County no later than August 7, 2026. Adopting the ordinance and resolution at this meeting allows staff to complete the required filings within that deadline. The City’s municipal advisor, Urban Futures, Inc., and its bond and disclosure counsel, Anzel Galvan LLP, have assisted with the preparation of the election documents.
Analysis
Upon adoption by a two-thirds vote, the ordinance orders the submission of the bond proposition to the voters and, as an ordinance relating to an election, takes effect immediately under Government Code section 36937. The accompanying resolution calls the election, requests consolidation with the County’s statewide general election, approves the abbreviated ballot question, establishes the procedures and schedule for direct and rebuttal arguments and the City Attorney’s impartial analysis, and authorizes the filing of the Tax Rate Statement.
The bonds would finance a single, unified plan and program of municipal improvements consisting of: (a) on approximately four acres on Pulgas Avenue, an approximately 100,000- square-foot building to house a public library that is a safe space for our children and teens, a city hall, and related community-serving facilities as well as an approximately 20,000-squarefoot police department facility with an Emergency Operations Center; (b) a new park with track and field on approximately six acres on Pulgas Avenue; (c) water system infrastructure; and (d) stormwater system infrastructure.
The General Obligation bonds are intended to finance one portion of the City's broader Civic Center funding strategy. The estimated overall project budget is approximately $170,000,000, allocated as follows:
Project Estimated Cost
Main Building (Library, Community Space, City Hall) $120 Million Police Department and Emergency Operations Center $20 Million Civic Center Park and Track & Field $30 Million
Total $170 Million
219
PUBLIC HEARING 8.1
The City's current financing strategy consists of:
Funding Source Amount
General Obligation Bonds $90 Million
Donated Land (10 Acres) $29 Million
General Fund Commitment $20 Million
Anticipated Private Donations $21 Million
Remaining Funding Need $10 Million
Total $170 Million
The General Fund commitment of $20,000,000 was previously included in the City's budget, and staff continues to pursue additional private fundraising and other financing opportunities (including but not limited to applying for local, State, and federal grants) to close the remaining funding gap. As the project advances, staff will continue refining the financing plan and will return to the City Council as appropriate.
The figures shown in the tables above reflect Staff's current best estimates of project costs and funding sources; actual amounts may vary as the project is refined, and are subject to the additional qualifications, assumptions, and disclosures set forth in the full text of the measure, which is included in the Ordinance.
If two-thirds of the voters voting on the measure approve it, the City may issue up to $125,000,000 in general obligation bonds. Consistent with article XIII A, section 1(b)(2) of the California Constitution, bond proceeds may be applied only to the acquisition or improvement of real property (including fixtures and equipment that constitute improvements to real property), together with incidental costs of issuance and of the election; proceeds may not be used for general operating expenses.
The ordinance incorporates the accountability measures required by Government Code sections 53410 and 53411: bond proceeds will be used only for the specified purposes, will be deposited into a separate account held by the City, will be the subject of an annual report by the Director of Finance, and will be subject to an annual independent financial audit.
The City anticipates that approximately ten acres on Pulgas Avenue (combined estimated value of approximately $29 million) will be donated and seeks approximately $21 million in additional private contributions and approximately $10 million in local, state, and federal grants toward the civic center. Staff estimates the land donation will be finalized by September 2026; however, the final donation agreement is not in place; thus, no assurance can currently be given that any donation will be received. The bonds and the improvements are not contingent on the donations, and to the extent donated land is not received, bond proceeds may be used to acquire the necessary real property.
Because the measure combines several distinct project types within a single proposition, the election documents characterize the improvements as one unified plan and program of municipal improvements.
220
PUBLIC HEARING 8.1
Fiscal Impact
Placing the measure on the November 3, 2026, consolidated ballot will result in election costs charged by San Mateo County for a consolidated local measure. The precise amount (of the City Council elections plus two ballot measures) is set by the County and is currently estimated at approximately $78,000 to $93,600; these costs are payable from the General Fund and will be budgeted accordingly. Costs of preparing the measure (municipal advisor and bond and disclosure counsel) are payable under the professional services agreements previously authorized in connection with this matter.
The general obligation bonds do not obligate the General Fund. If the measure is approved by two-thirds of the voters, the bonds would be repaid solely from a voter-approved ad valorem property tax levied on taxable property in the City, estimated to average $105.26 per $100,000 of assessed value. Because debt service on voter-approved bonds is excluded from the City’s appropriations (Gann) limit under article XIII B of the California Constitution, issuance of the bonds does not affect that limit. The estimated cost of the improvements, the maximum principal amount ($125,000,000), the highest and average annual tax rates, the duration of the tax, and total debt service will be set forth in the Tax Rate Statement and the full text of the measure; certain of those figures remain subject to finalization by the municipal advisor.
Public Notice
The public was provided notice by making the agenda and report available on the City’s website and on a bulletin board located at City Hall: 2415 University Avenue, East Palo Alto.
In addition, after adoption the Ordinance will be published as required by Government Code section 43611 (once a day for at least seven days, or once a week for two weeks, in a qualifying newspaper, with first publication within 15 days after adoption), and the City Clerk will publish a synopsis of the measure and cause notice of the election to be given as required by the Elections Code.
Environmental
The action being considered by the City Council—adopting an ordinance ordering submission to the voters of, and a resolution calling an election on, a general obligation bond proposition— is not a “project” subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(4), because it is the creation of a government funding mechanism that does not involve any commitment to any specific project that may result in a potentially significant physical effect on the environment.
If the measure is approved by the voters, the City will conduct any environmental review required under CEQA for the specific improvements to be financed before the City commits to or carries out those improvements.
221
PUBLIC HEARING 8.1
Government Code § 84308
Applicability of Levine Act: No, as the proposed action does not entail an entitlement.
Analysis of Levine Act Compliance: Not applicable.
Attachments
1. Ordinance Ordering Submission of the Proposition (for second reading and adoption; with Exhibit A – Full Text of the Measure).
2. Resolution Calling the Election.
3. Tax Rate Statement
222
1 of 5
ORDINANCE NO. XX – 2026
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO
ORDERING THE SUBMISSION OF A PROPOSITION OF INCURRING A BONDED
INDEBTEDNESS TO THE QUALIFIED VOTERS OF THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO AT THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 3, 2026, FOR THE PURPOSE
OF FINANCING THE COST OF THE ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION AND IMPROVEMENT OF
CERTAIN MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
WHEREAS, on July 7, 2026, the City Council of the City of East Palo Alto (the “City”) adopted, by a two-thirds vote of all its members, a resolution entitled “Resolution of the City Council of the City of East Palo Alto determining that the public interest and necessity demand the acquisition, construction and improvement of certain municipal improvement projects, and their financing through the issuance of general obligation bonds,” pursuant to which the City Council has found and determined that the public interest and necessity demand the issuance of general obligation bonds to finance the cost of acquisition, construction and improvement of certain municipal improvements, consisting of a civic center, recreational facilities and park improvements, and water and stormwater system infrastructure projects, as more fully described herein; and
WHEREAS, clean and safe drinking water is a top priority for East Palo Alto residents, and the City must upgrade deteriorating water pipes and repair aging storm drains to prevent pollution from entering the Bay and flooding City streets; and
WHEREAS, East Palo Alto needs additional safe places for youth after school and during the summer, and the City should provide dedicated spaces for children and youth to play and gather, which help to keep them safe and out of trouble; and
WHEREAS, the East Palo Alto Library has not been significantly renovated in 40 years – it is is outdated, deteriorating, and overcrowded, with wait lists for literacy and children's programming due to a lack of space; and
WHEREAS, the City's vision is for a modern library with up-to-date technology, hands-on learning and maker spaces, and dedicated areas for children and teens so they have a safe place to go after school and during the summer; and
WHEREAS, other public buildings used by the community also have leaky roofs, faulty heating and cooling systems, and outdated electrical wiring; and WHEREAS, through community engagement and outreach, East Palo Alto residents also identified installing drinking water storage tanks and addressing earthquake safety as among the community's highest priorities; and
WHEREAS, the City estimates the cost of the improvements to total $205,000,000, consisting of (i) approximately $20,000,000 for the police department facility, including an emergency center, (ii) approximately $120,000,000 for the public library, City Hall, and related civic and community-serving 223
2 of 5
facilities, (iii) approximately $30,000,000 for recreational facilities and park improvements, and (iv) approximately $35,000,000 for water system and stormwater system infrastructure projects; and WHEREAS, existing funds and funding sources are inadequate to finance the improvements; and
WHEREAS, the City may have the opportunity to leverage private donations and state and federal grants to finance the improvements; and
WHEREAS, the owner of approximately four (4) acres of real property located on Pulgas Avenue has indicated its intent to donate said property to the City if the issuance of the Bonds is approved by two-thirds of all voters voting on the proposition, and the City expects to construct said civic center thereon; and
WHEREAS, the owner of approximately six (6) acres of real property located on Pulgas Avenue has indicated its intent to donate said property to the City if the issuance of the Bonds is approved by two-thirds of all voters voting on the proposition, and the City expects to construct and develop said recreational facilities and park improvements thereon; and WHEREAS, the combined estimated value of said approximately ten (10) acres of real property is approximately $29,000,000, leaving $176,000,000 in estimated improvement costs to be funded with other sources; and
WHEREAS, the City intends to finance the remaining $176,000,000 in estimated improvement costs through the issuance of the Bonds ($125,000,000), funds on hand in the City’s General Fund ($20,000,000 expected to be appropriated), private cash donations ($21,000,000 goal), and local, state and federal grants ($10,000,000 goal); and
WHEREAS, the City’s goal is to raise $21,000,000 through private cash donations and $10,000,000 in state and federal grants, and to restrict said donations and grants to financing the civic center; and
WHEREAS, the City has not entered into any agreement providing for any of said donations or grants, no assurance can be given that any of said donations or grants will be received by the City, and neither the issuance of the bonds described herein nor the undertaking of the municipal improvements to be financed is contingent upon receipt thereof; and
WHEREAS, said donations or grants are expected to be restricted to the purposes hereinbefore described, and the City does not expect to receive them if the proposed measure herein described is not approved by two-thirds of the voters voting on the proposition; and WHEREAS, to the extent said expected donations of real property are not received, the municipal improvements to be financed include the acquisition of real property therefor, as described in the full text of the Measure; and
WHEREAS, to provide for the issuance by the City of general obligation bonds to provide financing for said improvements, it is necessary for the City Council to adopt an ordinance ordering the 224
3 of 5
submission of the proposition of incurring bonded indebtedness for such purpose to the qualified voters of the City at a municipal election; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to submit said ballot measure to the qualified voters of the City at the regular election to be held in the City on November 3, 2026, and to consolidate the bond election with other elections held within the City on that date;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. FINDINGS
The foregoing recitals are true and correct, and the City Council so finds and determines.
SECTION 2. PURPOSE AND INTENT
Pursuant to the authority provided by the California Government Code and California Elections Code, the City Council proposes to order the submission of a proposition of incurring bond indebtedness to the qualified voters of the City at the general municipal election to be held on November 3, 2026.
SECTION 3. CALL FOR ELECTION
The City Council hereby orders that a proposition of incurring bond indebtedness (hereinafter referred to as the “Measure”) be submitted to the qualified voters of the City in the form, and for the purposes, set forth in the Measure at the regular election to be held on November 3, 2026.
SECTION 4. MEASURE
The City Council hereby submits the Measure to the qualified voters of the City, at the regular election to be held on November 3, 2026. The statement of the Measure shall be in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit A.
SECTION 5. OBJECT AND PURPOSE OF BONDS
The Measure authorizes the issuance of general obligation bonds (the “Bonds”), the object and purpose of which is to finance the cost of the acquisition, construction and improvement of certain property to be used for municipal purposes (the “Improvements”), consisting of the following: (a) acquisition of approximately four (4) acres of real property located on Pulgas Avenue (or any other real property in the City) and the construction of a civic center thereon consisting of (i) an approximately 20,000 square foot police department facility, including an emergency operations center, and (ii) an approximately 100,000 square foot building to house a public library, City Hall, and related civic and communityserving facilities; (b) acquisition of approximately six (6) acres of real property located on Pulgas Avenue (or any other real property in the City) and the construction and development of recreational facilities and park improvements thereon, including, but not limited to, a track and field facility and related park amenities; (c) design, acquisition, construction, reconstruction, replacement, expansion, improvement, and equipping of water system infrastructure projects identified in the City’s capital improvement program, applicable water system master plans and as may otherwise be approved from time to time by the City Council consistent with the purposes described in this clause (c), including, but not limited to, water storage facilities, water mains and distribution pipelines, and related facilities and improvements necessary to improve system reliability, capacity, resiliency, and long-term service 225
4 of 5
delivery; and (d) design, acquisition, construction, reconstruction, replacement, expansion, improvement, and equipping of stormwater system infrastructure projects identified in the City’s capital improvement program and applicable stormwater system master plans and as may otherwise be approved from time to time by the City Council consistent with the purposes described in this clause (d), including, but not limited to, storm drains and related facilities and improvements necessary to improve drainage capacity, flood protection, water quality, and system reliability.
The Improvements are also intended to address earthquake safety, including through the design and construction of new facilities and infrastructure built to current seismic safety standards, in addition to building a new Emergency Operations Center, both of which enhance the resiliency of municipal facilities, infrastructure, and disaster response, in the event of natural disasters, including earthquake, flooding, and fires.
The Improvements described above together constitute, and are intended by the City Council to constitute, a single, unified plan and program of municipal improvements for the City, and the listing of individual projects is intended to describe the components of that unified plan.
The authorized Improvements also include all work, facilities and expenditures necessary and incidental to the projects described above. Examples of such work, facilities, and expenditures include, but are not limited to: costs of design, engineering, architect and other professional services, inspections, site preparation, utilities, landscaping, construction management and other planning and permitting, legal, accounting and similar costs; a customary construction contingency; demolition and disposal of existing structures; rental or construction of storage facilities and other space on an interim basis for materials and other equipment and furnishings displaced during construction; addressing unforeseen conditions revealed by construction or renovation, and other necessary improvements required to comply with existing building codes and other applicable law, including the Americans with Disabilities Act; costs of the bond election; bond issuance costs; project administration during the duration of such projects; and financing and interest costs on the Bonds. Proceeds of the Bonds shall be applied only to the acquisition or improvement of real property, including fixtures and other equipment constituting improvements to real property, and to costs necessary or incidental thereto, consistent with Section 1(b)(2) of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution.
The final costs, locations, designs, layouts and other components of the Improvements will be determined as plans are finalized, construction bids are awarded, and projects are completed. The City Council shall determine the priority, order, and timing of the Improvements, the Improvements may be undertaken and completed in any order, and the completion of any individual project is not contingent upon the completion of any other project. The City Council cannot guarantee that the Bonds will provide sufficient funds to allow completion of all needed Improvements.
SECTION 6. ESTIMATED COST OF IMPROVEMENTS
The estimated cost of the Improvements is $205,000,000. The estimated cost includes legal or other fees, the costs of printing the Bonds, and other costs and expenses incidental to or connected with the authorization, issuance and sale of the Bonds. To the extent the Improvements financed are revenueproducing public works, the cost of the Improvements may also include bond interest estimated to accrue during the construction period and for a period of not to exceed 12 months after completion of construction.
226
5 of 5
SECTION 7. PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF BONDS
The aggregate principal amount of the Bonds to be issued is not to exceed $[125,000,000].
SECTION 8. MAXIMUM INTEREST RATE
The maximum rate of interest to be paid on the Bonds shall be 12% per annum. Said interest shall be payable semiannually, except that interest for the first year after the date of the Bonds may be made payable at the end of said year.
SECTION 9. ISSUANCE AND SALE OF BONDS
The City proposes to issue and sell the Bonds pursuant to Article 1, commencing with Section 43600, of Chapter 4 of Division 4 of Title 4 of the California Government Code, or Article 4.5, commencing with Section 53506, of Chapter 3 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the California Government Code, in one or more series, in the maximum amount and for the objects and purposes set forth above if two-thirds of all qualified voters voting on the proposition set forth above vote in favor thereof. The Bonds will be general obligations of the City payable from and secured by ad valorem taxes levied and collected in the manner prescribed by the laws of the State of California. The revenue generated from the ad valorem tax levied and collected will be used for the payment of debt service on the Bonds. All the Bonds shall be equally and ratably secured, without priority, by the taxing power of the City.
SECTION 10. MANNER OF CONDUCTING ELECTION
The election on the Measure held on November 3, 2026, shall be held and conducted, election officers appointed, voting precincts designated, ballots printed, polls opened and closed, ballots counted, and returned, returns canvassed, results declared, and all other proceedings incidental to and connected with the election shall be regulated and done in accordance with the provisions of law regulating the election with which it is consolidated.
SECTION 11. PROCEDURE FOR VOTING ON PROPOSITION
Ballots for the election shall be provided in the form and in the number provided by law. Voters shall be provided an opportunity to vote for or against the proposition on the ballot, in accordance with procedures to be adopted by the authorized officers of the County of San Mateo charged with conducting the election.
SECTION 12. ACCOUNTABILITY REQUIREMENTS
In accordance with Sections 53410 and 53411 of the California Government Code, the City Council hereby adopts the following accountability requirements relating to the Bonds:
(a) The specific purpose of the Bonds is to finance the Improvements; and (b) The proceeds from the sale of the Bonds will be used only for the purposes specified in the Measure and not for any other purpose; and
(c) The proceeds of the Bonds will be deposited into a separate account to be created and held by the City; and
227
6 of 5
(d) The Director of Finance of the City shall file a report with the East Palo Alto City Council at least annually showing the amount of Bond proceeds collected and expended, and the status of the Improvements; and
(e) All expenditures also will be subject to an annual independent financial audit to confirm that Bond expenditures are consistent with the intent of the Measure.
SECTION 13. IDENTIFICATION OF TAX
The tax imposed by the Measure is an ad valorem tax levied upon taxable real property in the City and will be used to pay the principal and interest on the Bonds.
SECTION 14. OFFICIAL ACTIONS
The Mayor, the City Manager, the Assistant City Manager, the Director of Finance, the City Clerk, and any of their designees, are hereby authorized to execute any documents and to perform all acts necessary to place the Measure on the ballot.
SECTION 15. TAX RATE STATEMENT
The City Council hereby finds that the estimates and projections contained in the Measure and in the Tax Rate Statement required by Section 9401 of the California Elections Code presented at this meeting and on file with the City Clerk have been made based on currently available information but depend on a number of variables. Such estimates and projections have been made in good faith and are not binding or intended to be limitations on the terms of the general obligation bonds proposed to be authorized in the Measure. The City Manager and Director of Finance, each acting alone, are hereby authorized to finalize and execute the Tax Rate Statement, and to file the tax rate statement with the San Mateo County Registrar of Voters.
SECTION 16. INTERPRETATION
The provisions of this Ordinance, being necessary for the health, welfare, and safety of the City and its residents, are to be liberally interpreted to carry out its purposes. No error, irregularity or informality, and no neglect or omission of any officer, in any proceeding taken related to the submission of the Measure to the qualified voters of the City shall void or invalidate any such proceeding, any Bonds issued by the City or any levy of ad valorem taxes to pay principal of and interest on the Bonds.
SECTION 17. SEVERABILITY
If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect any other provisions or applications, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be severable.
SECTION 18. PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE
This Ordinance shall be published once a day for at least seven days in a newspaper published at least six days a week in the City, or once a week for two weeks in a newspaper published less than six days a week in the City. The first of said publications shall, in either event, be within 15 days after the adoption of this Ordinance. If there are no such newspapers, it shall be posted in three public places in the City for two succeeding weeks. No other notice need be given. 228
7 of 5
SECTION 19. EFFECTIVE DATE
In accordance with Section 36937(a) of the California Government Code, this Ordinance shall become effective immediately, as an ordinance relating to an election, upon its adoption by two-thirds vote of all the members of this City Council.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of July 2026, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Webster Lincoln, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
James Colin, City Clerk John D. Lê, City Attorney
229
EXHIBIT A
MEASURE TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AUTHORIZING
THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO TO ISSUE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS
TO FINANCE MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
SECTION 1. Findings.
WHEREAS, the City intends to issue general obligation bonds to finance the acquisition, construction and improvement of municipal improvement projects, and the City Council has found and determined that the public interest and necessity demand the issuance of general obligation bonds to finance the cost of acquisition, construction and improvement of certain municipal improvements, consisting of a civic center, recreational facilities and park improvements, and water and stormwater system infrastructure projects, as more fully described herein; and WHEREAS, the proposed improvements will address earthquake safety by providing modern, seismically resilient facilities and infrastructure that better protect the health and safety of City residents, employees, and visitors in the event of an earthquake; and WHEREAS, existing funds and funding sources are inadequate to finance the Improvements; and WHEREAS, the City may have the opportunity to leverage private donations and state and federal grants to finance the Improvements; and
WHEREAS, the owner of approximately four (4) acres of real property located on Pulgas Avenue has indicated its intent to donate said property to the City if the issuance of the Bonds is approved by twothirds of all voters voting on the proposition, and the City expects to construct said civic center thereon; and
WHEREAS, the owner of approximately six (6) acres of real property located on Pulgas Avenue described has indicated its intent to donate said property to the City if the issuance of the Bonds is approved by two-thirds of all voters voting on the proposition, and the City expects to construct and develop said recreational facilities and park improvements thereon; and WHEREAS, the combined estimated value of said approximately ten (10) acres of real property has been estimated by the current owner to be $29,000,000, leaving $176,000,000 in estimated Improvement costs to be funded with other sources; and
WHEREAS, the City intends to finance the remaining $176,000,000 in estimated Improvement costs through the issuance of the Bonds ($125,000,000), funds on hand in the City’s General Fund ($20,000,000 expected to be appropriated), private cash donations ($21,000,000 goal), and local, state and federal grants ($10,000,000 goal); and
WHEREAS, the City’s goal is to raise $21,000,000 through private cash donations and $10,000,000 in state and federal grants, and to restrict said donations and grants to financing the civic center; and WHEREAS, the City has not entered into any agreement providing for any of said donations or grants, no assurance can be given that any of said donations or grants will be received by the City, and neither the issuance of the Bonds nor the undertaking of the proposed improvements is contingent upon receipt thereof; and
230
WHEREAS, said donations and grants are expected to be restricted to the purposes hereinbefore described, and the City does not expect to receive them if the proposed measure herein described is not approved by two-thirds of the voters voting on the proposition; and WHEREAS, to the extent any such expected donations of real property are not received by the City, the proposed improvements include the acquisition of real property therefor with proceeds of the Bonds; and
SECTION 2. Object and Purpose of Bonds.
This Measure authorizes the issuance of general obligation bonds (the “Bonds”), the object and purpose of which is to finance the cost of the acquisition, construction and improvement of certain property to be used for municipal purposes (the “Improvements”), consisting of the following: (a) acquisition of approximately four (4) acres of real property located on Pulgas Avenue (or any other real property in the City) and the construction of a civic center thereon consisting of (i) an approximately 20,000 square foot police department facility, including an emergency operations center, and (ii) an approximately 100,000 square foot building to house a public library, City Hall, and related civic and communityserving facilities; (b) acquisition of approximately six (6) acres of real property located on Pulgas Avenue (or any other real property in the City) and the construction and development of recreational facilities and park improvements thereon, including, but not limited to, a track and field facility and related park amenities; (c) design, acquisition, construction, reconstruction, replacement, expansion, improvement, and equipping of water system infrastructure projects identified in the City’s capital improvement program, applicable water system master plans and as may otherwise be approved from time to time by the City Council consistent with the purposes described in this clause (c), including, but not limited to, water storage facilities, water mains and distribution pipelines, and related facilities and improvements necessary to improve system reliability, capacity, resiliency, and long-term service delivery; and (d) design, acquisition, construction, reconstruction, replacement, expansion, improvement, and equipping of stormwater system infrastructure projects identified in the City’s capital improvement program and applicable stormwater system master plans and as may otherwise be approved from time to time by the City Council consistent with the purposes described in this clause (d), including, but not limited to, storm drains and related facilities and improvements necessary to improve drainage capacity, flood protection, water quality, and system reliability.
The Improvements are also intended to address earthquake safety, including through the design and construction of new facilities and infrastructure built to current seismic safety standards to enhance the resiliency of municipal facilities and infrastructure in the event of an earthquake.
The Improvements described above together constitute, and are intended by the City Council to constitute, a single, unified plan and program of municipal improvements for the City, and the listing of individual projects is intended to describe the components of that unified plan.
The authorized Improvements also include all work, facilities and expenditures necessary and incidental to the projects described above. Examples of such work, facilities, and expenditures include, but are not limited to: costs of design, engineering, architect and other professional services, inspections, site preparation, utilities, landscaping, construction management and other planning and permitting, legal, accounting and similar costs; a customary construction contingency; demolition and disposal of existing structures; rental or construction of storage facilities and other space on an interim basis for materials and other equipment and furnishings displaced during construction; addressing unforeseen conditions revealed by construction or renovation, and other necessary improvements required to comply with existing building codes and other applicable law, including the Americans with 231
Disabilities Act; costs of the bond election; bond issuance costs; project administration during the duration of such projects; and financing and interest costs on the Bonds. Proceeds of the Bonds shall be applied only to the acquisition or improvement of real property, including fixtures and other equipment constituting improvements to real property, and to costs necessary or incidental thereto, consistent with Section 1(b)(2) of Article XIII A of the California Constitution.
The final costs, locations, designs, layouts and other components of the Improvements will be determined as plans are finalized, construction bids are awarded, and projects are completed. The City Council shall determine the priority, order, and timing of the Improvements, the Improvements may be undertaken and completed in any order, and the completion of any individual project is not contingent upon the completion of any other project. The City Council cannot guarantee that the Bonds will provide sufficient funds to allow completion of all needed Improvements.
SECTION 3. Estimated Cost of Improvements.
The estimated cost of the Improvements is $205,000,000. The estimated cost includes legal or other fees, the costs of printing the Bonds, and other costs and expenses incidental to or connected with the authorization, issuance and sale of the Bonds. To the extent the Improvements financed are revenueproducing public works, the cost of the Improvements may also include bond interest estimated to accrue during the construction period and for a period of not to exceed 12 months after completion of construction.
SECTION 4. Principal Amount of Bonds.
The aggregate principal amount of the Bonds to be issued is not to exceed $125,000,000.
SECTION 5. Maximum Interest Rate.
The maximum rate of interest to be paid on the Bonds shall be 12% per annum.
SECTION 6. Accountability Requirements.
The following accountability measures apply to the issuance of the Bonds pursuant to this Measure (a) The specific purpose of the Bonds is to finance the Improvements; and (b) The proceeds from the sale of the Bonds will be used only for the purposes specified in this Measure and not for any other purpose; and
(c) The proceeds of the Bonds will be deposited into a separate account to be created and held by the City; and
(d) The Director of Finance of the City shall file a report with the East Palo Alto City Council at least annually showing the amount of Bond proceeds collected and expended, and the status of the Improvements; and
(e) All expenditures also will be subject to an annual independent financial audit to confirm that Bond expenditures are consistent with the intent of this Measure. 232
RESOLUTION NO. XX– 2026
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO
PLACING A MEASURE TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO TO ISSUE
GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS AT THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 3, 2026, REQUESTING CONSOLIDATION WITH THE STATEWIDE GENERAL
ELECTION, AND SETTING PROCEDURAL DETAILS
WHEREAS, the City of East Palo Alto (the “City”) is authorized to issue general obligation bonds to finance municipal improvements pursuant to certain provisions of the California Government Code, including Article 1, commencing with Section 43600, of Chapter 4 of Division 4 of Title 4 and Article 4.5, commencing with Section 53506, of Chapter 3 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5; and WHEREAS, on July 7, 2026, the City Council of the City adopted, by a two-thirds vote of all its members, a resolution entitled “Resolution of the City Council of the City of East Palo Alto determining that the public interest and necessity demand the acquisition, construction and improvement of municipal improvement projects, and their financing through the issuance of general obligation bonds,” pursuant to which the City Council has found and determined that the public interest and necessity demand the issuance of general obligation bonds to finance the cost of acquisition, construction and improvement of certain municipal improvements (the “Improvements”), generally consisting of a civic center (an approximately 100,000-square-foot building housing a public library approximately three times the size of our current library, community spaces, and city offices, as well as an approximately 20,000-square-foot police department facility with an Emergency Command Center), recreational facilities and park improvements (including a track and field facility), and water and stormwater system infrastructure projects, as more fully described in the hereinafter defined Measure; and WHEREAS, clean and safe drinking water is a top priority for East Palo Alto residents, and the City must upgrade deteriorating water pipes and repair aging storm drains to prevent pollution from entering the Bay and flooding City streets; and
WHEREAS, East Palo Alto needs additional safe places for youth after school and during the summer, and the City should provide dedicated spaces for children and youth to play and gather, which help to keep them safe and out of trouble; and
WHEREAS, the East Palo Alto Library has not been significantly renovated in 40 years – it is is outdated, deteriorating, and overcrowded, with wait lists for literacy and children's programming due to a lack of space; and
WHEREAS, the City's vision is for a modern library with up-to-date technology, hands-on learning and maker spaces, and dedicated areas for children and teens so they have a safe place to go after school and during the summer; and
WHEREAS, other public buildings used by the community also have leaky roofs, faulty heating and cooling systems, and outdated electrical wiring; and WHEREAS, through community engagement and outreach, East Palo Alto residents also identified installing drinking water storage tanks and addressing earthquake safety as among the community's highest priorities; and
233
Resolution No. XX-2026 2 of 5
WHEREAS, the Improvements constitute a single, unified program of municipal improvements; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is required by the California Constitution as well as other applicable provisions of California law to submit the proposal for bonded indebtedness to the voters for their consideration; and
WHEREAS, on the date hereof, the City Council adopted, by a two-thirds vote of all its members, an ordinance entitled “An ordinance of the City Council of the City of East Palo Alto ordering the submission of a proposition of incurring a bonded indebtedness to the qualified voters of the City of East Palo Alto at the general municipal election to be held on November 3, 2026, for the purpose of financing the cost of the acquisition, construction and improvement of certain municipal improvement projects” (the “Ordinance”), ordering the submission to the voters of a proposition authorizing bonded indebtedness to the voters of the City for their consideration; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to request that the Board of Supervisors of San Mateo County consolidate such election with the statewide general election to be held on the same date; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to have the Registrar of Voters of San Mateo County render certain services in connection with the consolidated election.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO HEREBY:
1. Call for Election; Abbreviated Measure. The City Council hereby orders submitted to the voters at an election to be held in the City on November 3, 2026, a measure designated by letter by the Registrar of Voters of San Mateo County authorizing the sale of general obligation bonds by the City to finance the costs of Improvements (the “Measure”), to appear on the ballot for said election in substantially the following form:
East Palo Alto Community/Water/Public Safety
Infrastructure Measure. Shall the measure constructing
a Library, Emergency Command Center, civic center,
youth sports park; replacing deteriorating water pipes to provide safe/ clean drinking water; repairing storm drains to prevent flooding; addressing earthquake safety, by
authorizing East Palo Alto to issue $125,000,000 in
general obligation bonds, with annual levies averaging
$105.26 per $100,000 of assessed value (raising
approximately $8,940,000 annually) while bonds are
outstanding, with independent audits/ public disclosure, be adopted?
YES
NO
2. Full Text of Measure. The full text of the Measure is attached as Exhibit A to the Ordinance and is incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in full. The full text of the Measure shall be 234
Resolution No. XX-2026 3 of 5
printed in the voter information guide. The Measure shall not take effect unless approved by a two-thirds vote of the voters voting on the question.
3. Consolidation. Pursuant to California Elections Code Sections 10002, 10400, and 10403, the City hereby requests that the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors and the Registrar of Voters consolidate the election on the City’s Measure with the Statewide general election to be held on November 3, 2026, and further requests the services of the San Mateo County Registrar of Voters in carrying out the election for the City’s Measure, including sending to the City’s registered voters all required election materials, conducting the election, canvassing the vote received, and taking all steps necessary and required for the holding of the election for the City’s Measure within the City. The City Clerk of the City shall receive the canvass as it pertains to the election on the City’s Measure from San Mateo County and shall certify the results to the City Council to the extent required by law.
4. Manner of Conducting Election. The City acknowledges that the consolidated election will be held and conducted in the manner prescribed in Section 10418 of the California Elections Code.
The location of the central counting place for the ballots to be cast at the election shall be as established by the Board of Supervisors of San Mateo County or the Registrar of Voters of San Mateo County. The precincts, ballot drop box locations and hours of operations, vote center locations and hours of operations, vote-by-mail procedures and timing, and election officers, and all other persons and procedures for the election shall be the same as those utilized by San Mateo County.
5. Impartial Analysis. The City Council directs the City Clerk to submit to the City Attorney a copy of the Measure, and the City Attorney is hereby authorized and directed to prepare an impartial analysis of the Measure showing its effect on the existing law and operation of the Measure.
The impartial analysis shall be submitted by the City Attorney to the City Clerk on or before Tuesday, August 18, 2026, at 5:00 p.m., shall not exceed 500 words in length, and otherwise shall comply in all respects with the applicable provisions of the California Elections Code.
6. Direct Arguments. The last day for filing direct arguments for or against the Measure shall be Tuesday, August 11, 2026, at 5:00 p.m., and all such arguments shall be filed with the City Clerk of the City of East Palo Alto, 2415 University Avenue, East Palo Alto, California 94303, and shall not exceed 300 words in length. Each argument shall be filed with the City Clerk, signed, and include the printed name(s) and signature(s) of the author(s) submitting it, or if submitted on behalf of an organization, the name of the organization, and the printed name and signature of at least one of its principal officers who is the author of the argument. The arguments shall be accompanied by the “Form of Statement to be filed by Author(s) of Argument” as provided by the City Clerk. Arguments received prior to the deadline shall be confidential until the deadline.
The City Clerk, upon receipt of arguments and after the filing deadline, shall immediately transmit copies to any known opposing parties who may then submit rebuttals within the time period described in Section 7 below.
7. Rebuttals. The last day for filing rebuttal arguments for or against the Measure shall be Tuesday, August 18, 2026, at 5:00 p.m., and all such arguments shall be filed with the City Clerk of the City of East Palo Alto, 2415 University Avenue, East Palo Alto, California 94303, and shall not exceed 250 words in length. The rebuttal arguments shall be accompanied by the “Form of Statement to be filed by Author(s) of Argument” as provided by the City Clerk. Arguments received prior to the deadline shall be confidential until the deadline. 235
Resolution No. XX-2026 4 of 5
8. Examination Periods. Pursuant to Section 9295 of the California Elections Code, there shall be a 10-day public review period for the impartial analysis, arguments submitted for or against the Measure, and rebuttal arguments. These time periods are established as follows:
(a) with respect to the impartial analysis, commencing on Tuesday, August 18, 2026, at 5:00 p.m. and closing on Friday, August 28, 2026, at 5:00 p.m.; (b) with respect to arguments submitted for or against the Measure, commencing on Tuesday, August 11, 2026, at 5:00 p.m. and closing on Friday, August 21, 2026, at 5:00 p.m.; and
(c) with respect to rebuttal arguments, commencing on Tuesday, August 18, 2026, at 5:00 p.m. and closing on Friday, August 28, 2026, at 5:00 p.m.
The City Clerk shall comply with all provisions of law establishing priority of arguments for printing and distribution to the voters and shall take all necessary actions to cause the selected arguments to be printed and distributed to the voters. Rebuttal arguments shall be printed in the same manner as the direct arguments. Each rebuttal argument shall immediately follow the direct argument which it seeks to rebut.
9. Compliance with Other Applicable Laws. In all particulars not recited in this Resolution, the election shall be held and conducted as provided by law for holding municipal elections.
10.Synopsis of Measure. The City Council hereby directs the City Clerk to publish a synopsis of the Measure pursuant to Elections Code Section 12111.
11.Transmittal of Resolution. The City Clerk is authorized to transmit a certified copy of this Resolution to the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors and Registrar of Voters.
12.Official Actions. Each of the City Manager, the Assistant City Manager, the Director of Finance, and the City Clerk, and any of their designees, is hereby authorized and directed to work with the appropriate officials of San Mateo County to carry out the purposes and intent of this Resolution, including preparing, signing and/or filing any supplemental documents, agreements, or materials.
13.Partial Invalidity. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this Resolution which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Resolution are severable. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Resolution irrespective of the invalidity of any particular portion thereof.
14.Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. 236
Resolution No. XX-2026 5 of 5
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of July 2026, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Webster Lincoln, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
James Colin, City Clerk John D. Lê, City Attorney
237
TAX RATE STATEMENT
An election will be held in the City of East Palo Alto (the “City”) on November 3, 2026, to authorize the sale of up to $125,000,000 in bonds of the City to finance the specific projects listed in the measure. If such bonds are authorized, the City expects to sell the bonds in one or more series. Principal and interest on the bonds will be payable solely from the proceeds of ad valorem tax levies made upon the taxable property in the City. The following information is provided in compliance with sections 9400-9404 of the California Elections Code. Such information is based upon the best estimates and projections presently available from official sources, upon experience within the City, and other demonstrable factors.
Based upon the foregoing and projections of the City’s assessed valuation:
1. The best estimate of the average annual tax rate that would be required to be levied to fund the bond issue over the entire duration of the bond debt service, based on a projection of assessed valuations available at the time of filing of this statement is $105.26 per $100,000 of assessed valuationof all property to be taxed. The best estimate of the final fiscal year in which the tax is anticipated to be collected is 2057.
2. The best estimate of the highest tax rate that would be required to be levied to fund the bond issue, based on a projection of assessed valuations available at the time of filing this statement is $114.41 per $100,000 of assessed valuation of all property to be taxed. The best estimate of the first fiscal year in which the highest tax rate will apply is 2028.
3. The best estimate of the total debt service, including the principal and interest, that would be required to be repaid if all the bonds are issued and sold is $268,205,658.
Voters should note that such estimated tax rates are specific to the repayment of bonds issued under this authorization and are and will be in addition to tax rates levied in connection with other bond authorizations approved or to be approved by the City or any other overlapping public agency.
Voters should note that estimated tax rate is based on the assessed value of taxable property on San Mateo County’s official tax rolls, not on the property’s market value. Property owners should consult their own property tax bills to determine their property’s assessed value and any applicable tax exemptions.
Attention of all voters is directed to the fact that the foregoing information is based upon projections and estimates only, which amounts are not maximum amounts or durations and are not binding upon the City. The actual debt service amounts, tax rates and the years in which they will apply may vary from those presently estimated, due to variations from these estimates in the timing of bond sales, the amount of bonds sold and market interest rates at the time of each sale, and actual assessed valuations over the 238
term of repayment of the bonds. The dates of sale and the amount of bonds sold at any given time will be determined by the City based on need for funds and other factors. The actual interest rates at which the bonds will be sold will depend on the bond market at the time of each sale. Actual future assessed valuation will depend upon the amount and value of taxable property within the City as determined by the San Mateo County assessor in the annual assessment and the equalization process.
Director of Finance
City of East Palo Alto
July 17, 2026
239
PUBLIC HEARING 8.2
EAST PALO ALTO
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
Karen Camacho, Interim Community Development Director
Shiri Klima, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Adoption of Temporary Housing Development Incentive Program for Smaller Projects Ordinance
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution:
1. Based on the findings required by East Palo Alto Municipal Code (EPAMC) Section
18.114.060, find that the proposed Temporary Housing Development Incentive Program (THDIP) Ordinance is consistent with the General Plan, including the Housing Element, and supports the City’s ability to meet its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) by income category; will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City; and is internally consistent with the Development Code;
2. Waive the second reading and adopt an uncodified ordinance, as set forth as Attachment 1 in this report, titled “Temporary Housing Development Incentive Program for Smaller Projects” (“THDIP”);
3. Direct the City Manager or designee to adopt Administrative Guidelines for the implementation of the THDIP; and
4. Find the proposed actions do not constitute “projects” with the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15378(b)(4) and 15378(b)(5) (governmental, administrative or financial activity) and Section 15061(b)(3) (common sense).
DATE: July 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Melvin E. Gaines, City Manager
BY:
Yajaira Morales, Interim Community & Economic Development Manager Elena Lee, Planning Manager
240
PUBLIC HEARING 8.2
Alignment with City Council Strategic Plan
This recommendation is primarily aligned with:
Priority: Comprehensive Housing
Priority: Land Use, Economic, and Workforce Development Executive Summary
Staff recommends that the City Council waive the second reading and adopt the ordinance establishing the Temporary Housing Development Incentive Program for Smaller Projects (“THDIP”), to be effective for eighteen (18) months (Attachment 1). Prior to introduction, Council directed staff to make the following changes to the ordinance, as set forth in Attachment 1 and summarized in Table 1 below:
Table 1. Proposed THDIP Ordinance Provisions
Section Ordinance Provisions
Purpose Temporarily incentivize new housing production by removing inclusionary housing requirements for certain smaller projects while the City participants in the countywide Grand Nexus and Feasibility Study and considers permanent updates to the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance based on the study’s findings.
Program Duration Effective until December 30, 2027 (with complete Vertical Building Permit application due by January 30, 2028).
Rental Projects &
Ownership
Projects
IHO Applies
Small Project
Exemption
Projects with 20 units or fewer exempt from inclusionary housing requirements.
SB 330 Projects Eligible to participate if they amend their inclusionary obligations and become subject to current development impact fees;
alternatively, they may retain existing obligations.
Off-Site
Compliance
Projects
Excluded from THDIP due to the project-specific nature of their affordability agreements.
Eligibility
Requirements
Projects must obtain approval of a THDIP waiver, apply for a qualifying vertical building permit, and pay applicable permit fees before the program expires.
241
PUBLIC HEARING 8.2
Section Ordinance Provisions
Program
Elements
Unchanged
Existing rules related to affordability requirements, affordability monitoring, in-lieu fee calculations, unit standards, construction timing, and long-term affordability restrictions remain in effect.
On July 7, 2026, the City Council introduced the attached ordinance with the following vote:
AYES: Mayor Webster Lincoln, Councilmembers Dinan and Barragan NOES: Councilmembers Abrica and Romero
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The item went to the Planning Commission on July 13, 2026. Per State statute and East Palo Alto Municipal Code (EPAMC), the proposed THDIP requires findings of consistency with the General Plan, including the Housing Element, and supports the City’s ability to meet its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) by income category; that the Ordinance will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City; and that the Ordinance is internally consistent with the Development Code. Staff recommended that Planning Commission make these findings; Planning Commission found that it could not make these findings for the reasons summarized in this report.
Staff continues to recommend that the City Council find that the THDIP is consistent with the General Plan and that there is substantial evidence in the record such that the City Council may make the requisite findings. Still, the Council should consider the Planning Commission’s determination and rationale for that determination and decide whether the Council can make find that the proposed THDIP is consistent with the General Plan, including the Housing Element, and supports the City’s ability to meet its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) by income category; that the Ordinance will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City; and that the Ordinance is internally consistent with the Development Code.
If so, staff recommends the City Council waive the second reading and adopt the THDIP as set forth as Attachment 1. Finally, the Council should consider directing the City Manager to adopt Administrative Guidelines for the implementation of the THDIP.
Background
Inclusionary Housing Policies Generally and the City’s Ordinance Specifically Inclusionary housing policies typically require residential developers to provide a percentage of units at below-market prices or rents as part of new development. The City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (“IHO”) is codified in Chapter 18.37 of the East 242
PUBLIC HEARING 8.2
Palo Alto Municipal Code. The IHO was originally adopted in 1994 and has been amended several times, most recently in 2019, with minor amendments in 2025. The City first adopted Inclusionary Housing guidelines (“Guidelines”) as a companion document to the IHO on October 20, 2020. The last update to the Guidelines was on July 16, 2025. The Guidelines are intended to assist developers by addressing the key components of the IHO.
Chapter 18.37 applies to newly constructed residential development, including the residential component of mixed-use projects, subject to certain exemptions. Accessory dwelling units and lot split projects developed pursuant to Senate Bill 9 are currently exempt.
For residential developments consisting of five or more units, the IHO requires that twenty percent of the units be provided as inclusionary units on the same site as the development unless the City Council approves an alternative compliance option (such as paying in-lieu fees). For developments with fewer than five units, the developer chooses to either pay an in-lieu fee or provide one inclusionary unit.
Rental projects must provide inclusionary units at multiple income levels, including units affordable to households at approximately 35 percent, 50 percent, and 60 percent of area median income (“AMI”). Ownership projects must provide units affordable to households at approximately 80 percent and 120 percent of AMI. Affordability restrictions are generally required in perpetuity.
The IHO allows alternative compliance options with City Council approval, including offsite construction, payment of in-lieu fees, accessory dwelling units, or other methods that provide an equivalent or greater public benefit. When alternative compliance is approved, the required percentage increases to 25 percent.
Analysis
Currently, Chapter 18.37 applies to most projects with one or more units. In contrast, many programs in the region exempt smaller projects from inclusionary requirements.
The THDIP as introduced by the City Council on July 7, 2026, temporarily exempts projects up to twenty units from the inclusionary requirements to incentivize this construction type.
The term “pipeline projects” refers to projects with an approved or entitled application, or a pending application or pre-application, that are not yet built. As of June 23, 2026, there are 17 projects in the City’s pipeline that propose to have 20 or fewer units. Fourteen of these projects propose to have ten or fewer units. The 17 proposed projects with 20 or fewer units combined propose 128 total units. This represents 3% of the 3,966 total units currently in the City’s pipeline.
243
PUBLIC HEARING 8.2
The existing IHO’s 20-percent inclusionary housing requirement for these 128 units would require approximately 26 affordable units to be provided. Under the THDIP, these affordable units would not be required if the applicants attain vertical building permits by January 30, 2028. Considering the 3,966 units in the City’s pipeline, and the corresponding 793 inclusionary units currently required under the IHO, the THDIP would reduce the number of affordable units by 3%, going from 793 to 767 affordable housing units being required.
Required Findings Related to the THDIP
The proposed THDIP requires findings of consistency with the General Plan, including the Housing Element, supporting the City’s ability to meet its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) by income category; that the Ordinance will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City; and that the Ordinance is internally consistent with the Development Code.
Below is staff’s analysis of those findings related to the THDIP.
1. The THDIP is Consistent with Vista 2035 General Plan and the RBD Specific Plan:
The proposed THDIP is consistent with the Land Use and Urban Design Element and the Housing Element of the City's Vista 2035 General Plan, as well as the Ravenswood Business District Specific Plan (RBD)3. The program implements and advances numerous General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs intended to increase housing production, expand housing choice, facilitate affordable housing development, and assist the City in meeting its RHNA obligations. As set forth more fully below, the City, through its Housing Element, has planned substantially for housing units, and its RHNA obligations require the approval of units across all income categories. Specifically, the THDIP is consistent with the following:
Land Use Element – Goal LU-3: Expand the variety and diversity of housing opportunities throughout the City by increasing the supply and range of housing types in a manner that enhances quality of life, supports multigenerational living, and strengthens community connectedness.
By removing the affordable housing requirements for 128 of 3,966 total proposed housing units in the City’s pipeline, the THDIP will require 26 fewer affordable units to be provided than the 793 required under the existing IHO. This represents a 3% reduction in potential affordable housing units. At the same time, if inclusionary housing requirements are a barrier to housing production, the removal of requirements for smaller projects could result in 17 projects with 128 units advancing.
244
PUBLIC HEARING 8.2
Ultimately, the THDIP maintains the inclusionary requirements for 97% of pipeline projects in the City while potentially catalyzing the development of 128 units that have been stalled. This expands the variety and diversity of housing opportunities throughout the City by increasing the supply and range of housing types in a manner that enhances quality of life, supports multigenerational living, and strengthens community connectedness.
Land Use Element – Goal LU-4: Expand opportunities for multifamily residential development to provide a broader range of housing choices for existing and future residents while increasing the City's overall housing supply.
The THDIP furthers this goal by supporting policies that encourage a more diverse residential building stock and expanded housing opportunities by providing greater flexibility for inclusionary housing requirements for qualifying projects of 20 or fewer units. With respect to affordable units, the THDIP does not exempt any housing projects of 21 units or more (97% of pipeline projects), thus preserving the City’s current IHO requirements for the largest projects that produce the most market-rate as well as inclusionary units.
RBD Specific Plan – Goal LU-1: A balance of land uses that satisfies residents’ needs for a complete mix of residential, retail, commercial, industrial, and public uses.
The THDIP supports the goal and policies that promote balanced residential development, encourage income-restricted affordable housing, provide incentives for housing production, and facilitate actions necessary for the City to create housing to support a diverse range of uses in the RBD area. Housing Element: The THDIP is consistent with the Housing Element's policies and implementation programs that promote housing production across a range of income levels, including measures designed to facilitate achievement of the City's Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) requirements. Here are some relevant Housing Element goals:
o Housing Element - Goal 1: Create more housing opportunities and more housing that is affordable to East Palo Alto.
Considering all of its aspects, the THDIP furthers Goal 1 and does not obstruct its attainment. The program is designed to induce near-term construction of housing that the record indicates is otherwise stalled: 17 pipeline small projects have not pulled building permits, and staff testified that the program’s purpose is to “find opportunities to increase housing generation that will help meet our RHNA requirements”. The exemption is 245
PUBLIC HEARING 8.2
narrow — limited to projects of twenty (20) units or fewer — and the full Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, including its on-site and in-lieu requirements, remains in force for all projects of twenty-one (21) or more units, where the majority of the City’s units, and affordable units, are produced. The program also preserves State Density Bonus affordability (Gov. Code § 65915) and the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance’s existing inlieu and off-site compliance options. Staff estimated that the affordable units potentially affected are uncertain – one hundred and twenty-eight (128) units or 3% of the total pipeline of 3,966 units as of June 23, 2026, and sixteen (16) units or <1% of the total sites inventory of 1,933 units listed in the Housing Element — and that it is unknown how many eligible projects will opt in before the program sunsets on December 30, 2027. Staff recognizes that Goal 1 expressly emphasizes affordability and that some otherwise-required affordable units may be forgone, if moderate and above moderate units are built in their place; on balance, however, that modest and uncertain reduction is outweighed by the program’s production benefit and by retention of the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance for larger projects, such that the amendment furthers Goal 1’s twin objectives of more housing and more affordable housing and does not obstruct their attainment. o Housing Element – Goal 3: Create homeownership opportunities for East Palo Alto residents and stability for existing homeowners.
By removing the requirement to provide affordable housing units, the THDIP will lower the cost of providing market rate units. This could reduce the costs of those market rate units for potential homeowners. While the East Palo Alto median household income is lower than would be necessary to afford a market rate unit, the TDHIP for Smaller Projects will only apply to 128 of 3,966 pipeline housing units. East Palo Alto residents with abovemedian household income levels could benefit from the production of 128 market rate units; particularly if they are priced lower due to lower production costs.
o Housing Element – Goal 4: Prevent displacement of East Palo Alto residents.
Considering all of its aspects, the THDIP does not obstruct — and in part furthers — Goal 4. As staff explained, Goal 4 is multipronged and itself includes a housing-production sub-goal tied to the Ravenswood Business District plan to develop new housing; by facilitating that production, the amendment directly advances that prong. The program applies to net-new 246
PUBLIC HEARING 8.2
development on vacant or underutilized sites and does not authorize the demolition or conversion of existing occupied affordable housing, so it causes no direct displacement. The City’s direct anti-displacement tools — rent stabilization, the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance for projects of twentyone (21) or more units, and its preservation and rental-assistance programs — remain fully in effect. The sites inventory continues to accommodate the City’s remaining Regional Housing Needs Allocation in every income category by substantial margins even if all affected pipeline projects participate (approximately 251% very-low, 513% low, 195% moderate, and 174% above-moderate income), consistent with Government Code section 65863 (Sites Inventory / No-Net-Loss analysis in the record). Staff acknowledges public testimony that increased market-rate supply may not by itself prevent displacement; because Goal 4 contains its own production objective, the program creates no direct displacement, and all direct antidisplacement measures remain intact, the amendment does not obstruct, and partially furthers, Goal 4. Finally, building at all income levels may reduce displacement pressure more generally.
.
o Housing Element – Goal 7: Create more housing opportunities for special needs households, including large households, people at risk of or experiencing homelessness, and individuals with disabilities.
The THDIP supports the goal and policies by encouraging the faster production of housing.
o Housing Element – Goal 9: Build City capacity for long-term housing planning and implementation of a range of Housing programs and initiatives.
The THDIP supports the goal and policies
by considering the potential financial impact of the
inclusionary housing requirements on new development.
o Housing Element – Goal 10: Amend Zoning and Other Development Regulations to Facilitate the Construction of Housing.
The THDIP is a temporary uncodified ordinance to facilitate the construction of housing projects.
247
PUBLIC HEARING 8.2
Applicable Legal Standard.
EPAMC § 18.114.060(B)(1)(a) provides that a Development Code amendment “may be approved only if” the City first finds that the amendment “is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable Specific Plan.” Because the Housing Element is a mandatory element of the General Plan (Government Code Sections 65302, 65580 et seq.), a finding of General Plan consistency necessarily includes consistency with the Housing Element. State law independently requires the City’s zoning and development regulations to be consistent with the General Plan (Government Code § 65860) and requires the General Plan’s elements to be internally consistent (Government Code § 65300.5).
Housing Element and RHNA by income category.
Temporarily exempting certain projects
from inclusionary housing obligations is consistent with the Housing Element and the City’s obligation to accommodate its remaining RHNA by income category.
Table RHNA 6 Progress
Income Level RHNA 6
Allocation 2023 2024 2025 Total Progress
Percentage
by Income
Category
ELI
(<30% AMI) 165
0 0 41 41
54% VLI
(31% - 50% AMI) 0 26 22 48
LI
(51% - 80% AMI) 95 5 8 84 97 102%
MOD
(81% - 120% AMI) 159 2 7 5 14 9%
Above-MOD
(>120% AMI) 410 7 8 6 21 5%
Total 829 14 49 158 221 27 %
For the current planning period, the City’s RHNA allocation is 165 extremely and very lowincome units, 95 low-income units, 159 moderate-income units, and 410 above-moderate income units. The City’s RHNA progress (building permits issued) to date is 89 extremely and very low-income units, 97 low-income units, 14 moderate-income units, and 21 above-moderate income units.
Staff has reviewed the Housing Element programs that rely on the IHO (Policy
1.26, Program 3.1, Policy 4.13, Policy 7.8, and Program 9.6) and the City’s housing sites inventory. The City’s progress in terms of Housing Element compliance is primarily on planning for affordable and deeply affordable units, with modest progress toward 248
PUBLIC HEARING 8.2
moderate and above-moderate. Per the RHNA, the City has met its lowincome units requirement and has met approximately half of its very lowincome units requirement, but the City has not made critical progress in its required moderate-income and above-moderate-income units. The THDIP’s focus on incentivizing housing development generally is thus consistent with achieving the City’s RHNA, which makes it consistent with the Housing Element.
No Net Loss and Adequate Sites.
Government Code § 65863 requires the City to ensure adequate sites remain available to accommodate its remaining unmet RHNA by income category. The draft ordinance preserves the City’s authority to make the required findings on a project-by-project basis and does not reduce the residential capacity identified in the City’s housing sites inventory. Attachment 1 provides an overview of the Housing Element inventory and includes in red the potential unit affordability that might be impacted by the THDIP.
City Council is seeking to exempt projects with 20 or fewer units from IHO requirements. As described earlier, by removing the affordable housing requirements for 128 of 3,966 total proposed housing units in the City’s pipeline, the THDIP will require 26 fewer affordable units to be provided than the 793 required under the existing IHO. This represents a 3% reduction in potential affordable housing units. At the same time, if inclusionary housing requirements are a barrier to housing production, the removal of requirements for smaller projects could result in 17 projects with 128 units advancing.
Ultimately, the THDIP maintains the inclusionary requirements for 97% of pipeline projects in the City while potentially catalyzing the development of 128 units that have been stalled.
This expands the variety and diversity of housing opportunities throughout the City by increasing the supply and range of housing types in a manner that enhances quality of life, supports multigenerational living, and strengthens community connectedness.
A similar analysis can be made by reviewing the City’s Sites Inventory listed in the Housing Element, and provided in greater detail in the July 13, 2026 Planning Commission report. In the City’s 2023-2031 Housing Element, adopted in March 2024, the City projected a Sites Inventory with the following breakdown: a total pipeline of 1001 units (including entitled or approved projects), 817 opportunity sites, and 115 ADUs. Despite the potential changes to the Sites Inventory units’ affordability levels, the City’s Sites Inventory still significantly exceed the City’s RHNA 6 units in all income categories, and would only experience a <1% overall reduction in number of affordable units. Given this margin of compliance, the proposed THDIP is not expected to significantly hamper the City’s progress toward site adequacy (no net loss).
Factors Supporting General Plan Consistency.
Temporary and self-reverting. The incentive program is time-limited and conditioned on near-term construction milestones; absent timely performance, 249
PUBLIC HEARING 8.2
projects revert to the full Chapter 18.37 requirements. The program does not reduce the densities identified in the Housing Element; it only exempts certain projects from its requirements (primarily small unit developments, i.e., 20 or fewer units).
Affordability preserved through State law. The program preserves all applicable State Density Bonus affordability requirements (Government Code § 65915).
Advances Housing Element production
goals. By temporarily reducing development costs during a period of constrained project feasibility, the program is intended to accelerate overall housing production for a limited swath of projects (20 or fewer units). Interim measure pending data. The program serves as a temporary bridge while the Grand Nexus and Feasibility Study is being completed, after which the City will consider permanent amendments to the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.
2. The THDIP Will Not Be Detrimental to
the Public Interest, Health, Safety, Convenience, or Welfare of the City; In addition to General Plan consistency, EPAMC § 18.114.060(B)(1)(b) requires a finding that the amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City, and § 18.114.060(B)(2) requires a finding that it is internally consistent with the Development Code. The program is voluntary, time-limited, and preserves State-law affordability protections. The temporary ordinance exempts projects with 20 or fewer units but retains all other aspects of the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance requirements and General Plan goals and policies, including required densities. And, because the proposed ordinance amendment is expected to incentivize the production of housing by eliminating a cost factor for certain small-scale projects, it is expected to be consistent with public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare by generating more housing overall. So, while 26 inclusionary units in the pipeline projects could potentially be waived by the THDIP, a possible 128 market rate units could be incentivized and built sooner than otherwise. Additionally, for the projects proposing over 20 units, the 72 affordable units and 3838 total units remain as the THDIP does not affect such projects. Accordingly, staff believe both findings can be made.
3. The proposed amendment is internally consistent with other applicable provisions of the Development Code.
EPAMC § 18.114.060(B)(2) also requires that potential amendments be reviewed for internal consistency with other applicable sections of the Development Code. The proposed THDIP potentially waives the inclusionary housing requirements for small projects to incentivize development. However, all other components remain, and this is only a temporary change. The Development code was reviewed and the proposed 250
PUBLIC HEARING 8.2
THDIP is internally consistent with all other aspects of the Municipal Code. Therefore, the THDIP, as currently introduced, is as consistent with the Development Code as the current IHO.
Planning Commission Findings
At the July 13, 2026, Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission expressed they could not make the finding that the THDIP is consistent with the General Plan. The Planning Commission also expressed it could not make the findings that the THDIP will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City.
The Commission's findings focused primarily on General Plan Goal 1 (creating more housing opportunities and more housing that is affordable to East Palo Alto) and Goal 4 (preventing displacement of East Palo Alto residents), concluding that the program would not produce affordable housing units and that affordable units would be permanently lost.
General Plan consistency is measured against the General Plan as a whole under a deferential legislative standard, not by requiring every individual program to independently satisfy every policy or goal. The THDIP advances the General Plan's broader housing objectives by preserving existing affordability protections while providing an additional compliance pathway that supports housing production and helps maintain the City's ability to meet its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) obligations.
Staff’s original recommendation to the Planning Commission accounts for the City's continuing obligation to identify opportunities to increase housing production to satisfy its RHNA requirements at all income levels, including on the moderate and above moderateincome levels. The THDIP has the potential to facilitate additional housing units that contribute toward those obligations.
Accordingly, the THDIP should be viewed as an additional tool to increase housing production while preserving existing affordability requirements, rather than replacing them. Expanding opportunities for housing development is consistent with the City's obligation to increase housing supply, maintain compliance with RHNA, and implement the General Plan when evaluated as a whole.
The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the City and is internally consistent with the Development Code. Staff respectfully submit that the City Council may make the required findings, consistent with staff’s original recommendation to the Planning Commission, after giving due consideration to the Planning Commission’s recommendation. 251
PUBLIC HEARING 8.2
Fiscal Impact
Adoption of the ordinance itself does not have an immediate fiscal impact.
However, implementation of the THDIP may reduce future inclusionary housing in-lieu fee revenue and affordable housing obligations associated with qualifying smaller development projects. The extent of any such reduction depends on the number and type of projects that utilize the program.
The purpose of the THDIP is to incentivize residential development activity during the temporary program period. While additional development activity could generate future economic and fiscal benefits to the City, including potential increases in property tax and other revenues, any attempts to quantify those impacts at this time are speculative.
Public Notice
The public was provided notice by making the agenda and report available on the City’s website and on a bulletin board located at City Hall: 2415 University Avenue, East Palo Alto. Additionally, notice of the second public hearing for July 21 was published in the local newspaper: San Mateo Daily Journal on July 16, 2026.
Environmental
The Temporary Housing Development Incentive Program (THDIP) Ordinance is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15378(b)(4) and 15378(b)(5). CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), commonly referred to as the “common sense exemption,” provides that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential to result in a significant effect on the environment, and that where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(a) provides that a project under CEQA is one that "has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment." Section 15378(b) provides that administrative and organizational activities that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment are not projects for purposes of CEQA.
The proposed Ordinance establishes a Temporary Housing Development Incentive Program, applicable to Smaller Projects, Pipeline Projects, and projects entitled pursuant to SB 330 that meet the applicability criteria. The Ordinance applies exclusively to residential and mixed-use development projects that have already secured the necessary land use entitlements and that have either completed environmental review under CEQA or are consistent with previously certified, adopted, or otherwise relied-upon CEQA documentation. The Ordinance does not approve or authorize any specific development 252
PUBLIC HEARING 8.2
project, nor does it expand development potential or introduce new land use entitlements beyond those previously analyzed.
The Ordinance temporarily modifies the implementation of existing affordable housing requirements contained in Chapter 18.37 by establishing a framework through which eligible projects may request a THDIP Waiver. As provided in the Municipal Code, the program allows for administrative adjustments to inclusionary housing requirements, inlieu fee obligations, and related affordability provisions, consistent with the objective standards of the ordinance.
The Ordinance does not result in any direct or indirect physical changes to the environment, as it governs administrative procedures and financial obligations associated with affordable housing compliance rather than land use intensity, site configuration, or construction activity. All participating projects are required to have received “Final Approval,” as defined by the ordinance, and therefore have undergone, or are consistent with, environmental review as required under CEQA. Because the Ordinance does not have the potential to have a significant effect on the environment, it can be seen with certainty that no such impacts would occur. Because the Ordinance governs administrative procedures and financial obligations and does not result in, or have the potential to result in, direct or indirect physical changes to the environment, it does not constitute a “project” under CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15378(b)(4) and (b)(5).
Government Code § 84308
Applicability of Levine Act: No, as the proposed action does not involve an entitlement.
Analysis of Levine Act Compliance: Not applicable.
Attachments
Attachment 1. Ordinance
253
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE NO. _______ (UNCODIFIED)
AN UNCODIFIED ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF EAST PALO ALTO
TEMPORARY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE PROGRAM
(THDIP) FOR SMALLER PROJECTS
WHEREAS, the City of East Palo Alto (“City”) is experiencing a housing crisis. California has one of the most expensive housing markets and one of the highest rates of homelessness in the nation. The City Council has adopted Chapter 18.37 of the East Palo Alto Development Code (Inclusionary Housing) (hereinafter referred to as the “Inclusionary Housing Ordinance” or “IHO”) in 2019, which was updated in 2025, in recognition of the need for homes affordable to lower income households in East Palo Alto and that Bay Area housing costs are high. The IHO’s purpose is to increase the supply of affordable housing by imposing inclusionary requirements for residential developers to help meet the needs of all community members; and WHEREAS, addressing the housing crisis requires a broad spectrum of land use and financing tools. For example, the Legislature has adopted State Density Bonus Law to address the financing gap by allowing a developer to include more total units in a project than would otherwise be allowed by the local zoning ordinance in exchange for affordable units. The City has a role to play too; and
WHEREAS, City staff has identified that smaller residential and mixed-use projects have received their land use planning entitlements but have not pulled any building permits to begin construction (defined below as “Pipeline Projects”). The applicants for these Pipeline Projects have raised a variety of concerns that the projects are not financially feasible. Because these projects are typical of the housing production in East Palo Alto, this suggests that residential development more broadly is not financially feasible under current economic conditions.
Economic conditions that render residential and mixed-use development infeasible threaten several important policy priorities of the City, including expansion of the City’s housing supply well as the creation of jobs and growth of tax revenue; and WHEREAS, as the IHO inclusionary housing requirements may affect the economic infeasibility of residential and mixed-use development, temporarily waiving the IHO requirements, for smaller projects as set forth in Section 4 below (“Temporary Housing Development Incentive Program for Smaller Projects”), may stimulate development for smaller projects, increase production of housing, create jobs, and grow tax revenue; and WHEREAS, on June 9, 2026, the City Council held a duly-noticed public hearing on the proposed Temporary Housing Development Incentive Program (“THDIP”) as required by State law and the East Palo Alto Development Code, but the Council did not take any action on this date; and
WHEREAS, on July 7, 2026, the City Council held another duly-noticed public hearing on 254
ORDINANCE NO.
the proposed THDIP; and
WHEREAS, after the public hearing, the City Council has considered the whole of the record for the THDIP, including all relevant testimony, and determined that it desires to adopt the THDIP by the ordinance below.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. FINDINGS
A. The City Council hereby finds that all the foregoing recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein by reference.
B. The City Council further finds that the THDIP is consistent with the City’s General Plan and housing priority policies for the reasons set forth in the staff report associated herewith and the Council adopts such reasons as its own.
C. The City Council further finds the proposed ordinance will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City.
D. The City Council further finds that the THDIP, in which the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance requirements in Chapter 18.37 are temporarily amended to waive the affordable housing requirements for Smaller Projects, is a programmatic regulatory adjustment that will provide an incentive for Smaller Projects to advance to the construction stage which furthers the City’s housing and other policy priorities. The incentive applies only to Smaller Projects that affirmatively request and are granted a THDIP Waiver and satisfy all applicable conditions; it does not apply automatically or of its own force, and confers no waiver of Chapter 18.37 until granted and all conditions are satisfied.
SECTION 2. CEQA COMPLIANCE
The City Council finds that the THDIP Ordinance is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15378(b)(4) and 15378(b)(5). CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), commonly referred to as the “common sense exemption,” provides that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential to result in a significant effect on the environment, and that where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(a) provides that a project under CEQA is one that "has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment." Section 15378(b) provides that administrative and organizational activities that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment are not projects for purposes of CEQA.
The proposed Ordinance establishes a THDIP, applicable to Smaller Projects that meet the applicability criteria. The Ordinance applies exclusively to smaller residential and mixed-use development projects that have or will either completed environmental review under CEQA or are consistent with previously certified, adopted, or otherwise relied-upon CEQA documentation.
The Ordinance does not approve or authorize any specific development project, nor does it 255
ORDINANCE NO.
expand development potential or introduce new land use entitlements beyond those previously analyzed.
The Ordinance temporarily modifies the implementation of existing affordable housing requirements contained in Chapter 18.37 of the East Palo Alto Development Code by waiving requirements for smaller projects.
The Ordinance does not result in any direct or indirect physical changes to the environment, as it governs administrative procedures and financial obligations associated with affordable housing compliance rather than land use intensity, site configuration, or construction activity. All participating projects are required to have received “Final Approval,” as defined by the ordinance, and therefore have undergone, or are consistent with, environmental review as required under CEQA. Because the Ordinance does not have the potential to have a significant effect on the environment, it can be seen with certainty that no such impacts would occur.
Because the Ordinance governs administrative procedures and financial obligations and does not result in, or have the potential to result in, direct or indirect physical changes to the environment, it does not constitute a “project” under CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15378(b)(4) and (b)(5).
SECTION 3. ADOPTION OF UNCODIFIED ORDINANCE
The following language, titled “Temporary Housing Development Incentive Program for Smaller Projects” is hereby adopted as follows:
UNCODIFIED ORDINANCE. TEMPORARY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE
PROGRAM FOR SMALLER PROJECTS
XXXX.01 Purpose
A. The purpose of this chapter is to temporarily provide development incentives for smaller residential and mixed-use development projects, to help meet the City’s regional share of housing needs, during an interim period of the effective date until (December 30, 2027).
B. To encourage construction of smaller residential projects subject to the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, the following Temporary Housing Development Incentive Program shall apply to eligible Smaller Projects that meet the applicability requirements.
C. The City Council of the City of East Palo Alto does hereby adopts an uncodified ordinance that has the effect of temporarily amending the Development Code, such that this section supersedes all relevant requirements in Chapter 18.37 of the East Palo Alto Development Code, to effectuate the purposes set forth herein.
XXXX.02 Definitions
This Chapter shall rely on the definitions of Chapter 18.37.020 and also the definitions below:
A. “Final Approval” shall mean that the residential or mixed-use development project has received all necessary entitlements to be eligible to apply for, and 256
ORDINANCE NO.
obtain, a building permit or permits and either of the following is met: (i) The expiration of all applicable appeal periods, petition periods, reconsideration periods, or statute of limitations for challenging that final approval, or (ii) If a challenge is filed, that challenge is fully resolved or settled in favor of the housing development project. Consistent with 65589.5(o)(2)(D).
B. “Smaller Projects” shall mean any residential or mixed-use project with less than 21 units. Projects proposing 21 or more units are not Smaller Projects and remain subject in full to Chapter 18.37.
C. “Pipeline Projects” means those residential development projects, including the residential mixed-use projects, that either: (a) have received all required land use planning entitlements as of the adoption of this Ordinance but have not yet obtained Vertical Building Permits for all residential components of the project, regardless of the building permit status for that project’s non-residential components or for one or more separate residential or mixed-use buildings or phases, or (b) have received all required land use planning entitlements after the adoption of this Ordinance with appeal period running prior to a request for THDIP Waiver.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, Pipeline Projects shall not include: (a) any project regulated by a development agreement, or any project that has already paid housing impact fees or in lieu fees.
D. “Projects entitled under a Development Agreement” shall mean projects that have a City-Council approved development agreement as obtained in compliance with applicable law, including Government Code Section 65864 and East Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 18.108.
E. “Projects entitled under SB 330” shall mean projects that invoked State Bill 330, also known as the Housing Crisis Act of 2019, codified in Government Code Chapter 654, for entitlement of the development project.
F. “THDIP Waiver” shall mean a City Manager, or their designee, approved project that meets the requirements of this ordinance. A THDIP Waiver is an optin benefit that a qualifying applicant must affirmatively request and that the City may grant; it does not apply automatically, is not a development standard, policy, or regulation applicable to any project of its own force, and confers no waiver of or exemption from Chapter 18.37 unless and until it is granted and all conditions in Section XXXX.03 (Applicability) are satisfied.
G. “Vertical Building Permit” shall mean foundation and/or core/shell, excluding grading permits and demolition permits.
257
ORDINANCE NO.
XXXX.03 Applicability
A. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all Smaller Projects, including Pipeline Projects, apply for a Vertical Building Permit for the residential or mixed-use development, and pay necessary permit fees by (December 30, 2027) and the Vertical Building Permit application is deemed complete by the City within 30 days, and no later than (January 30, 2028). In addition, the applicant must apply for and obtain approval of a THDIP Waiver, including satisfaction of conditions.
B. Smaller Projects that fail to meet the requisite conditions, including filing for a THDIP Waiver, filing for a Vertical Building Permit, or paying the associated building permit fee in full for the residential or mixed-use development by, or having the Vertical Building Permit application deemed complete within 30 days, and no later than (January 30, 2028) shall automatically revert to (and must comply with) the then current affordable housing requirements of Chapter 18.37.
The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to Smaller Projects entitled under a development agreement. Instead, applicants of projects so entitled shall seek City Council approval for any changes to the agreement, including any related documents, including changes to the Inclusionary Housing requirements, Inclusionary Housing Plan, and/or the Inclusionary Housing Agreement. In addition, projects that elect to comply with Chapter 18.37 through off-site construction of inclusionary units are excluded from this Chapter.
XXXX.05 Temporary Housing Development Incentive Requirements Provided that projects meet the applicability requirements of Section XXXX.03, and satisfies all conditions in Section XXXX.03, Affordable Housing Requirements in section
18.37.050 shall be temporarily superseded, solely as to qualifying Smaller Projects, by the following:
A. Temporary Housing Development Incentive for Smaller Projects. For Smaller Projects, as defined herein, the applicant may request a THDIP Waiver.
The THDIP Waiver shall exempt qualifying projects from Chapter 19.37 for the duration of this ordinance if the conditions are not satisfied the project remains subject to Chapter 18.37.
B. Temporary Housing Development Incentive Program for Smaller Projects entitled under SB 330. Projects entitled under SB 330 at or before the effective date of this ordinance that meet the applicability requirements detailed in Section XXXX.03(A) have the following options:
1. Maintain project’s entitlement rights and obligations as detailed in the project’s entitlements under SB 330, including affordable housing requirements per Chapter 18.37.050.
2. Request a change to the project’s entitlements, which would include both:
a. Waiver of affordable housing requirements in Chapter 18.37.050 and b. A signed affidavit requesting and agreeing to opt into the City of East Palo Alto’s then current Development Impact Fees, including but not 258
ORDINANCE NO.
limited to Parks & Trails, Public Facilities, Transportation, Storm Drainage, and Water Capacity as approved by City Council on March 4, 2025, or subsequently updated by action of City Council.
2. Smaller projects entitled under SB 330 subsequent to the effective date of this ordinance qualify for THDIP.
XXXX.06 Implementation
A. Eligible applicants shall file an update to the project entitlement with the City Manager or their designee of their intention to develop under THDIP Waiver for specific development projects. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the incentive is an opt-in benefit that applies only upon the applicant’s request and the City’s approval of a THDIP Waiver and satisfaction of all conditions; it does not apply of its own force and is not a development standard applicable to any project that does not qualify.
B. Notwithstanding any Development Code provisions to the contrary, in order to implement the Temporary Housing Development Incentive Program established by this Chapter, the City Manager or their designee is hereby authorized to review, approve, and modify, without a public hearing for discretionary review, the updated project entitlements as it pertains to this ordinance. In modifying entitlements, the City Manager or designee shall ensure that any Project receiving State Density Bonus benefits continues to meet the minimum affordability and all applicable requirements under the State Density Bonus Law (Gov. Code Section 65915 et seq.) for the full affordability term, and shall make the “no net loss” findings required under Government Code Section 65863.
Any modification to entitlements made pursuant to this Ordinance shall take effect, and any waiver or exemption shall attach, only upon satisfaction of the conditions set forth below, which are conditions of the entitlement inseparable from any benefit conferred, and shall include a condition that a Project must secure and pay for a Vertical Building Permit on residential or mixed use development on or before (December 30, 2027) that this permit application must be deemed complete by the City by (January 30, 2028) and that the developer must commit to pay all other City impact fees applicable to the affordability levels of the units (e.g., Parks & Trails, Public Facilities, Transportation, Storm Drainage, and Water Capacity Impact Fees), and if an applicant fails to do so, the affordable housing requirements applicable to the project shall automatically revert to the then current affordable housing requirements of Chapter 18.37.
All terms of Chapter 18.37 not explicitly temporarily superseded by this Chapter shall apply to residential or mixed-use projects that seek a THDIP Waiver.
B. Continued Validity of Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Except as expressly provided for in this Ordinance, all provisions of Chapter 18.37 shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 4. SAVINGS CLAUSE
259
ORDINANCE NO.
If any section, subsection, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion or sections of the Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted the Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional.
SECTION 5. CONSISTENCY
Any provision of the East Palo Alto Municipal Code inconsistent with this uncodified Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby inapplicable and the provisions of this Ordinance control to the extent necessary to effectuate this Ordinance.
SECTION 6. PUBLICATION
The City Clerk shall publish this Ordinance as an uncodified ordinance in accordance with applicable law.
SECTION 7. EFFECTIVE DATE AND SUNSET PROVISION
This Ordinance shall be effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall expire by operation of law on (January 30, 2028), unless extended by an amendment of this ordinance by the City Council before that date.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this ____ day of ______, 2026, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Webster Lincoln, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
James Colin, City Clerk John D. Lê, City Attorney
260
POLICY AND ACTION 9.1
EAST PALO ALTO
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
DATE: July 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Melvin E. Gaines, City Manager
BY: Michael Cortez, Associate Engineer
Batool Zaro, Senior Engineer
Humza Javed, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Water Storage Tank Siting Study (WS-09)
Recommendation
Receive a presentation of the 50% Draft Supplemental Technical Memorandum (STM) for the Water Storage Tank Siting Study (WS-09) from EKI Environment & Water, Inc. and provide feedback on the proposed locations and configurations presented in the draft study.
Alignment with City Council Strategic Plan
This recommendation is primarily aligned with:
Priority: Public Health, Safety, and Quality of Life
Priority: Public Infrastructure and Utilities
Background
In 2022, a Water System Master Plan (WSMP) was prepared by EKI Environment & Water, Inc. for the City of East Palo Alto. The WSMP provided the city with an overall plan for potable water infrastructure improvements over the next twenty years, which would aid in maintaining water system reliability and support anticipated development within the city’s service area.
This 2022 WSMP included discussions on multiple items relating to city-owned water infrastructure, including its existing water system facilities, existing and future water demands, water system hydraulic model development and evaluation, and, most notably, an evaluation of the City’s existing water supply and storage capacity.
The evaluation of the City’s existing water supply included an analysis of the following:
261
POLICY AND ACTION 9.1
The city’s overall existing and future supply capacity; individual supply capacity from each of its supply sources; the need for storage tanks and their ability to meet both peak-hour demands and maximum-day demands, plus fire flows under existing and future conditions. As of now, the only other alternative supply sources within the city include the Gloria Way groundwater well.
Planned projects that will increase supply include the Pad D standby well and the proposed 1.5 million gallon (MG) water tank at 375 Donohoe Street.
Based on the supply and storage evaluations presented in the 2022 WSMP, the City’s current required storage capacity is 3.02 MG. The city receives a groundwater credit in the amount of
0.16 MG from Gloria Way well. Hence, the city is currently in a water storage deficit of 2.86 MG.
In the future, the City’s storage capacity requirement increases to 5.2 MG. With a groundwater credit of 0.16 MG from Gloria Way Well, the future need comes down to 5.04 MG. If projects such as the Pad D storage tank, 1.5 MG water storage tank at 375 Donohoe Street, and PAD D well are built and designated for City use, a further credit of 2.19 MG is achieved, leaving a future deficit of 2.85 MG (5.04MG-2.19MG). This information has been tabulated below:
Storage Component Existing Future
Available
Storage
Capacity (MG)
Existing Storage Capacity -- --
Groundwater Credit (a) 0.16 0.16
Planned Groundwater Credit (a) -- 0.54
Planned Storage Capacity (b) -- 1.65
Total Existing and Planned Storage Capacity 0.16 2.35
Required
Storage
Capacity (MG)
Operational 0.51 1.04
Emergency 1.56 1.04
Fire Storage 0.96 0.96
Total Projected Required Storage Capacity 3.02 5.20
Total Projected Storage Capacity Surplus/(Deficit) (2.86) (2.85) Abbreviations:
MG: million gallons
Notes:
(a) Groundwater credit is calculated as the capacity of the wells with backup power over an 18-hour period.
(b) Planned storage capacity includes the 1.5 MG storage tank at 375 Donohoe and the 0.15 MG Pad D Tank.
On June 7, 2024, the city published a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the Water Storage Tank Siting Study (WS-09). At the December 3, 2024, City Council meeting, Council awarded a contract to EKI Environment & Water, Inc. to conduct the siting study to identify suitable locations for water storage tanks within the City.
262
POLICY AND ACTION 9.1
Analysis
City staff and EKI’s project team have been exploring various design options for water storage in the city. These design options were based on a wide range of criteria which included the following:
Location within the city
Parcel ownership
Maximum tank size and/or quantity of storage tanks that could fit on the parcel (i.e. parcel size and shape)
Existing and neighboring land uses
Proximity to water transmission mains
Hydraulic modeling
Conceptual-level cost estimates for each site
Ease of operations & maintenance
Construction and aesthetic impacts to residents and other stakeholders CEQA considerations
Climate change/sea-level rise resilience
Geologic considerations
The factors described above have been summarized in the draft Supplemental Technical Memorandum (STM), which will identify and recommend up to three (3) locations for water storage tanks in order to meet the City’s required storage of 3.0 MG.
High-level details of the draft water storage tank siting study have been tabulated below:
Site
No. Location
Storage
Capacity
(MG)
Qualitative Summary Recommendation
1 1893 Woodland
Avenue (Old RV
Park)
3.0 Strong hydraulic benefit and
substantial capacity but
requires private acquisition.
Advance for further
consideration.
2 2474 Pulgas
Avenue 3.0
Can accommodate the full
storage need on a compact
site. Contamination & Land
Use restrictions are the
primary risk.
Advance for further
consideration; land
has restrictions in
CC&Rs
3 Bell Street Park 0.66
Low storage volume and
impacts an existing park.
Remove from
consideration unless
the park layout
changes substantially.
263
POLICY AND ACTION 9.1
4 1266 Beech
Street (Future
MLK Park)
3.0 Technically feasible with
substantial capacity, but
visually prominent and likely
to affect Bayfront views and
future park use.
Retain only as a
secondary alternative.
5 Parcel at End of
Pulgas Avenue
(Future Athletic
Field)
3.0 Substantial capacity,
favorable separation from
residences, and good
hydraulic performance;
however, this site requires
coordination with the
athletic field development.
Remove from
consideration unless
the park layout
changes substantially.
U6
Tanklage Site at
1798 Bay Road 3.0
City-owned parcel and can
retain limited space for City
storage or related
operational uses.
However, further sitespecific hydraulic modeling,
environmental screening,
conceptual design, and cost
estimating are required
before same level of detail
comparison to other sites
can be made.
Proposed to be
added to detailed
evaluation.
The full contents of the 50% Draft STM, which includes detailed analyses of each of the abovementioned sites, can be found in Attachment 1 of this staff report.
Staff is seeking feedback from City Council on the findings of the 50% Draft STM. Based on the feedback received, EKI will finalize the STM, including preparation of three-dimensional renderings of the proposed improvements at the recommended locations. These renderings, along with the final findings, will be presented to City Council at a future City Council meeting after the STM has been finalized later in 2026.
Fiscal Impact
There is no fiscal impact for this item.
Public Notice
The public was provided notice by making the agenda and report available on the City’s website and on a bulletin board located at City Hall: 2415 University Avenue, East Palo Alto.
Environmental
The action being considered does not constitute a “Project” within the meaning of the California 264
POLICY AND ACTION 9.1
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to CEQA Guideline section 15378 (b)(5), in that it is a government administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect changes in the environment.
Government Code § 84308
Applicability of Levine Act: No, as the proposed action does not involve an entitlement.
Analysis of Levine Act Compliance: Not applicable.
Attachments
1. 50% Draft Supplemental Technical Memorandum Water Storage Tank Siting Study 265
10 July 2026
DRAFT MEMORANDUM
To: City of East Palo Alto
From: Tyler Colyer, PE
Chris Pittner, PE, QISP
Yuqing Gao
EKI Environment & Water, Inc.
Subject: Draft City of East Palo Alto Water Storage Tank Siting Study (EKI C40163.00)
EKI Environment & Water, Inc. (EKI) is pleased to present to the City of East Palo Alto (City) this draft technical memorandum that summarizes the findings from the water storage tank siting study and provides recommendations for potential locations of new potable water storage tanks.
BACKGROUND
As identified in the City’s 2022 Water System Master Plan (WSMP; EPA, 2023a), the City currently does not have any potable water storage facilities but is required by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Department of Drinking Water (DDW) to add emergency and fire water storage. The WSMP established storage criteria to size future storage facilities and recommended that 3.0 million gallons (MG) of additional storage would be needed to support the City’s existing and future system and water demand.
This recommended storage volume assumes that CIP-P6 (a 1.5 MG tank at 375 Donohoe Street) and CIPP7 (0.15 MG tank at the Pad D Site) are completed under the future scenario.
As shown on Figure ES-2 from the WSMP, two capital improvement projects for the construction of new water storage tanks within the City were identified, including CIP-WS-03A (a 1.5 MG tank with a 2 million gallon per day [MGD] pump station) and CIP-WS-03B (a 1.5 MG tank with a 2 MGD pump station).
The City has requested that this siting study identify potential locations for a total of 3 MG of potable water storage to support existing and future system needs.
STUDY SCOPE AND APPROACH
EKI’s approach to the tank siting study was developed in coordination with City staff and includes the following steps:
1) Identify Candidate Parcels: Review open and underutilized parcels throughout the City that may be able to accommodate new potable water storage tanks and associated facilities. 2) Perform Initial Screening: Evaluate the candidate parcels based on parcel size and geometry, hydraulic benefit, technical feasibility, property ownership, surrounding land uses, and potential permitting and environmental constraints. Based on this screening, select five sites for detailed evaluation.
3) Evaluate the Five Finalist Sites: Prepare conceptual layouts and evaluate the five finalist sites in greater detail, including tank storage capacity, pump station and appurtenance requirements, hydraulic modeling results, planning and land use considerations, conceptual-level costs, and 266
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) considerations. Environmental Science Associates (ESA) performed a preliminary environmental screening evaluation for each finalist site. 4) Present Findings for City Council Review: Present the detailed evaluation to the City Council for review and feedback regarding the relative advantages, constraints, and policy considerations associated with each site.
5) Select Preferred Sites and Prepare Renderings: Based on City Council feedback, select up to three preferred sites and prepare conceptual renderings illustrating how the proposed tanks and associated facilities could be integrated into the surrounding areas.
CITY WATER SYSTEM
As shown in Figure ES-1 and Figure ES-2, from the City’s WSMP, the City receives potable water from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) Regional Water System through three turnouts located in the northern portion of the City. Water is distributed through a single pressure zone consisting of approximately 40 miles of distribution pipelines. All imported water enters the system from the north and is conveyed to the remainder of the service area through transmission and distribution mains, including five crossings of U.S. Highway 101. Because the City has no storage and relies on supply entering from the northern portion of the system, the WSMP identified peak pressure and fire flow deficiencies during maximum day demands in portions of southern East Palo Alto. The WSMP recommends additional storage and distribution system improvements to address these deficiencies, and these findings were considered in the evaluation and ranking of potential tank sites.
267
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
268
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
269
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
INITIAL SCREENING
The first step in the tank siting study was to perform a broad, City-wide review of potentially available parcels before narrowing the analysis to a smaller group of candidate sites. This initial screening was intended to identify parcels that could reasonably accommodate a potable water storage tank and supporting facilities, while avoiding the premature elimination of sites that may warrant further consideration. The review included vacant and underutilized parcels, publicly and privately owned properties, parks, school fields, and areas planned for future development or redevelopment.
Each site was then evaluated at a high level to determine whether it appeared suitable for further study.
EKI performed a geographic information system (GIS) analysis utilizing data fromthe City, publicly available data, and satellite imagery to identify parcels with large open spaces that may be available for water storage tanks. Data reviewed included:
• Aerial imagery to locate vacant parcels;
• Parcel data to identify publicly or privately-owned parcels, parks, and schools; • Areas of known development or redevelopment within the City; • WSMP hydraulic modeling results for fire flow and peak hour pressure, • San Francisco Bay Area Planning and Urban Research Association (SPUR) maps (SPUR, 2024); and • Climate Action Plan and Adaptation Strategies (CAP) maps (EPA, 2023b).
An initial review of sea-level-rise, groundwater-rise, and flood-hazard mapping was completed using the City’s 2030 Climate Action Plan and Adaptation Strategies and SPUR’s 2024 groundwater-rise mapping. If suitable sites had been identified at substantially higher elevations in the western portion of the City, sealevel-rise resilience may have provided a meaningful basis for distinguishing between alternatives.
However, the five finalist sites are all located within generally low-lying portions of East Palo Alto and appear to have similar long-term exposure to flooding, shallow groundwater, and sea-level-rise effects.
Accordingly, these hazards do not provide a significant basis for differentiating among the sites, and each alternative would require site-specific flood-resilience measures during design. The City is also participating with Menlo Park in the regional SAFER Bay flood-protection program, while Palo Alto is separately advancing shoreline adaptation and levee-related projects; however, the timing and ultimate level of protection provided by these improvements should be confirmed before they are relied upon in facility design. For purposes of this evaluation, EKI has assumed that the City or region will implement a sea-level rise mitigation project (i.e., as levee or similar) to protect properties near the bay.
From this data, EKI created a list of 28 parcels for initial screening as shown in Attachment A and listed in Attachment B. For each of these parcels, EKI summarized available parcel information and performed the initial screening analysis based on criteria developed in coordination with City staff, as summarized in Table 1. Preliminary screening criteria include:
1. Parcel Size: this criterion considers the maximum tank size that could fit on the parcel (i.e., parcel size and shape).
2. Hydraulic Improvement: this criterion identifies to what degree the tank and pump station could provide hydraulic improvements to the City’s water system.
3. Technical Feasibility: this criterion considers the site’s feasibility for tank construction and potential for geotechnical issues related to proximity to the Bay. To a lesser degree, this criterion 270
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
also considers proximity to existing water mains, existing and neighboring land uses, and high-level cost considerations.
4. Property Ownership: this criterion evaluates the site’s current property owner, providing higher scores for City-owned parcels and lower scores for sites which may require engagement with private owners.
5. Permitting and Environmental Impacts: this criterion evaluates difficulty of permitting processes due to the site’s proximity to the bay shoreline, or areas with known environmental contamination.
Table 1 – Tank Siting Grading Matrix
Criteria Ranking
Low (1) Medium (2) High (3)
Parcel Size
Space for one 75-ft
diameter tank or less.
Approximately 0.5 MG of
storage or less.
Space for an 80-100-ft
diameter tank.
Approximately 0.75-1 MG
of storage.
Space for above a 100-ft
diameter tank.
Greater than 1 MG of
storage.
Hydraulic
Improvements
Provides low benefit:
located in an area with
acceptable fire flow and
pressure
Provides moderate
benefit: located near areas
with deficiency
Provides significant
benefit: located in lowpressure or fire flow
deficient areas
Technical
Feasibility
Requires a thick elevated
tank pad (i.e. anticipated
geotechnical issues, or
areas of high
groundwater)
At-grade or partially
buried tanks with some
potential for site
constraints (i.e. possible
geotechnical issues)
At-grade tank with
favorable site conditions
(i.e. no anticipated
geotechnical issue).
Property
Ownership
Private Owner (i.e.
single-family residences)
School District, Developer,
or Corporation owned City-Owned property
Permitting
and
Environmental
Impacts
Sensitive Site (i.e. areas
of contamination or site
with potential for high
mitigation burden)
Neutral Site (i.e. those
within school property
bounds, within a
residential area, or with
minor mitigation burden)
Favorable Site (i.e. no bay
proximity, and supportive
land use)
As shown in the preliminary tank siting conceptual layouts included in Attachment C, based on the preliminary siting study, five parcels were identified for further study, including:
1. 1893 Woodland Avenue (Old RV Park): This undeveloped parcel used to be an old recreational vehicle (RV) park. This parcel is well situated between San Francisquito Creek on the south and US 101 to the north and west.
2. 2474 Pulgas Avenue (Former Library Site): This undeveloped parcel was planned to be used for a new City library, but the City is now planning to construct the library at a different location.
3. Bell Street Park: This City-owned park site is located further south in the City.
4. 1266 Beech Street (Future MLK Park): This City-owned area is planned for future park expansion.
5. Parcel at the End of Pulgas Avenue (Future Athletic Field): The City has received a developer’s initial concept plans to build a new athletic field here as a part of the Ravenswood Redevelopment project. Additionally, the Ravenswood business district specific plan states that this area would have an approximately 1.5 MG tank.
271
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
DESIGN CRITERIA
To provide a consistent basis for comparing the five finalist sites, EKI developed planning-level design criteria for the conceptual tank layouts. These criteria reflect coordination with City Engineering and Planning staff, preliminary hydraulic modeling assumptions, input from tank manufacturers, and the anticipated requirements for potable water storage facilities. The criteria are intended to support the siting evaluation and will be refined during preliminary design after the City selects the preferred sites, storage volumes, and tank materials.
• Storage Objective: The conceptual layouts evaluate whether each site could accommodate a portion of, or up to approximately 3 MG of, new potable water storage. Although some individual sites could potentially accommodate most or all of the near-term storage need, the City may elect to distribute storage among multiple locations to improve system operations, reduce visual impacts, and better align the facilities with site-specific constraints. • Distributed Storage Approach: Distributing storage among multiple sites could improve system resilience and operational redundancy by reducing reliance on a single facility and allowing a portion of the City’s storage capacity to remain available during maintenance, equipment failure, or other outages. Distributed storage may also provide hydraulic benefits in multiple areas of the distribution system. In addition, an approximately 1.5 MG tank would generally have a smaller footprint and lower visual prominence than a single 3 MG tank, which may improve compatibility with nearby residential, park, and community uses. These benefits would need to be balanced against the additional cost from construction on multiple properties, equipment costs (pump station, generators, and controls), and maintenance requirements associated with operating multiple facilities.
• Property-Line Setbacks: For conceptual layout purposes, the layouts generally assume a minimum 20-foot setback from property lines.
• Landscape Screening: The conceptual layouts include a 10-foot-wide perimeter landscape buffer with trees and shrubs to screen tanks and associated equipment from adjacent properties and public roadways.
• Pump Station and Electrical Facilities: Each tank site is assumed to include a pump station and associated electrical equipment to convey water from storage into the City’s distribution system. The conceptual layouts generally assume a pump station/electrical building of approximately 450 square-foot (SF) and a preliminary pump station capacity of up to approximately 2,500 gallons per minute.
• Emergency Power: Each site is assumed to include a standby emergency generator located outdoors within a weather-resistant enclosure. The generator pad is assumed to be approximately 100 SF and sized to provide approximately 125-150 kW. • Constructability and Staging: The conceptual layouts include space for temporary construction staging, material laydown, and a construction trailer where feasible based on discussions with tank manufacturers.
• Hydraulic Modeling Assumptions: For conceptual modeling, the above-grade tank alternatives are assumed to operate with a normal water surface elevation approximately 30 feet above surrounding grade. The Bell Street Park alternative is modeled with a lower above-grade water surface elevation at 15 feet above grade because the tank would be partially buried. 272
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
Tank Material Comparison
The conceptual cost estimates evaluate both welded steel and prestressed concrete tanks. Both materials are commonly used for municipal potable water storage and can be designed to meet applicable structural, seismic, and water-quality requirements. However, the two systems differ in initial cost, maintenance needs, construction approach, tank geometry, and long-term service considerations, as summarized in Table 2.
Table 2 – Planning-Level Comparison of Tank Materials
Consideration Welded Steel Tank Prestressed Concrete Tank Initial Capital Cost Generally lower initial tank construction cost.
Generally higher initial tank construction
cost.
Long-Term
Maintenance
Requires periodic inspection and
maintenance of interior and exterior
coatings. Cathodic protection may also
require inspection, adjustment, and
eventual replacement.
Generally requires less coating and
corrosion-related maintenance, although
periodic structural inspections, sealant
replacement, and localized repairs may be
required.
Life-Cycle Cost Lower initial cost may be offset by
periodic recoating and corrosion-control
costs over the life of the facility.
Higher initial cost may be partially offset by
lower recurring coating and corrosionmaintenance costs.
Structural System Field-welded steel shell supported on a concrete foundation. The tank may be
anchored or unanchored depending on
the final seismic and structural design.
Reinforced concrete wall with
circumferential prestressing, typically
supported on a structural concrete floor
and foundation system.
Tank Geometry and
Footprint
Shell walls are relatively thin, but
required freeboard, usable water depth,
and roof design may result in a larger
diameter or taller overall profile for a
given storage volume.
Wall thickness is greater, but usable water
depth and roof configuration may allow a
smaller exterior diameter for some storage
volumes.
Roof and Freeboard Roof type and seismic design can
significantly affect required freeboard
and total tank height. Preliminary
concepts generally assume greater
freeboard for steel tanks.
Dome and flat-slab roof options are
available. Preliminary concepts generally
assume lower freeboard than comparable
steel tanks, although requirements vary by
diameter and roof design.
Construction
Considerations
Construction includes field erection,
welding, surface preparation, and
coating application. Coating work can be
sensitive to weather and environmental
conditions.
Construction includes cast-in-place
concrete work, prestressing, and curing.
Construction may require a longer
sequence and greater concrete-delivery
activity.
Future Inspection and
Rehabilitation
Interior access is periodically required
for coating inspection and recoating,
which may require the tank to be
removed from service.
Interior access is still required for
inspection, but major full-surface recoating
is generally not anticipated at the same
frequency as for steel tanks.
Expected Service Life Can provide a long service life of 60 to 80 years when coatings and corrosionprotection systems are properly maintained.
Generally expected to provide a longer
service life of upwards of 100 years per
AWWA-D110 with comparatively lower
corrosion-related maintenance.
273
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
Final tank material selection by the City should be based on a life-cycle evaluation that considers initial capital cost, periodic maintenance and rehabilitation, site geometry, geotechnical conditions, seismic design, constructability, visual compatibility, operational flexibility, and City preferences.
Tank Height and Storage Volume Assumptions
The conceptual layouts generally assume that the total height at each site is limited to approximately 35 feet. This height should be understood as a planning-level target for siting, visual screening, and zoning coordination, rather than a final design height. Final tank height will depend on the selected tank material, roof type, side wall height, required freeboard, structural design, and operating water levels.
For hydraulic modeling, the relevant parameter is the tank water surface elevation rather than the total height to the roof or dome. For land use, visual, and zoning review, the relevant parameter is the total above-grade structure height, including the tank wall, roof, dome, guardrails, vents, and other appurtenances as applicable. Therefore, the conceptual layouts should be interpreted as showing approximate planning envelopes. Final tank dimensions will be refined during preliminary design after the City selects preferred sites, storage volumes, and tank materials.
DETAILED EVALUATION
Based on the initial screening analysis, EKI performed a detailed evaluation of the five finalist sites to compare their technical feasibility, hydraulic benefit, permitting complexity, and relative cost. The detailed evaluation includes preliminary site layouts for each location, including conceptual tank footprints, pump station facilities, emergency generator, and associated site appurtenances. In addition, conceptual-level cost estimates were prepared for each site to support comparative evaluation and confirm consistency with the City’s capital improvement planning objectives.
Hydraulic modeling was performed using the City’s future demand scenario as defined in the 2022 WSMP, to evaluate the effect of each tank location on system pressures, fire flow availability, and peak hour operating conditions, as well as to identify any required off-site water main improvements and preliminary pump station operating settings.
ESA prepared a preliminary environmental screening assessment of the five candidate sites to identify potential environmental constraints and inform the City’s future CEQA compliance strategy. ESA’s full memorandum is provided in Attachment D.
Lastly, each site was qualitatively assessed based on operational considerations, land ownership, construction complexity, visual and community impacts, climate change and sea-level rise resilience, and anticipated geotechnical feasibility.
The results of this detailed evaluation are summarized in the following sections.
Site 1: 1893 Woodland Avenue (Old RV Park)
This proposed site is a former RV park located at 1893 Woodland Avenue, situated within the southern limits of East Palo Alto between Woodland Avenue and West Bayshore Road. The parcel is approximately
1.15 acres and is currently owned by Woodland Glory Investment LLC. The site’s zoning and land use designations are R-MD-1 and Medium Density Residential, respectively. Based on a major temporary use permit, there are plans to allow for construction staging yard to include equipment, materials, and the stockpiling of approximately 666 cubic yards of soil for up to one year at the location. 274
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
The site’s narrow elongated triangular geometry presents a primary constraint that may limit the maximum diameter of the proposed tank and necessitate a strategic layout to maintain required setbacks.
Of significant concern is the southern boundary along Woodland Avenue, which is immediately adjacent to San Francisquito Creek and Palo Alto across the creek. While the northwestern boundary is industrial, the site’s proximity to surrounding residential developments and condominiums will necessitate noise and visual mitigation measures during construction and long-term operation.
The proposed tank configurations for the 1893 Woodland Avenue site focus on maximizing storage capacity within the parcel's unique triangular footprint. As summarized in Table 3, this site can best accommodate the total storage in a dual tank configuration. The site may also accommodate a single larger tank configuration to maximize storage within one footprint.
Table 3 – Tank Configuration Dimensions for Site 1
Tank Diameter (ft) Height (ft) Capacity (MG)
Primary 120 35 2.0
Secondary 80 35 1.0
TOTAL 3.0
Depending on the configuration, cumulative tank capacity is up to 3.0 MG. As shown in the draft site plan, see Figure A in Attachment C, the layout maintains a 20-foot northwestern setback and includes a 10-foot perimeter tree screening strip for visual buffering. Supporting infrastructure includes a 450 SF pump station/electrical building and a 100 SF generator at the western end. The plan also integrates new 10- inch piping per City CIP Project P-30 and utilizes a paved southern road for access and construction staging.
Site 1: Modeling Results
Site 1 was modeled with a tank water surface approximately 30 feet above surrounding grade. The pump station was modeled with a discharge head of 130 feet, corresponding to a target discharge pressure of approximately 56.3 pounds per square inch (psi). These operating assumptions were selected to provide a generally consistent basis for comparing hydraulic performance among the five sites.
As shown on Figure 1, under future maximum-day-demand plus fire-flow conditions, 90 of the 106 hydrants that failed to meet their fire flow criteria in the baseline scenario (no CIPs) meet their criteria with Site 1. Overall, 308 of the 325 modeled hydrants meet their fire flow criteria, while 17 remain deficient. Relative to the recommended-CIP scenario from the WSMP, Site 1 provides an aggregate increase of approximately 81,100 gallons per minute (gpm) in available fire flow across matching hydrants, the largest increase of the five tank alternatives. Available fire flow increases at 213 hydrants. The current results do not identify a separate off-site transmission improvement beyond the P-30 piping and site connection.
Site 1: CEQA
Project feasibility regarding CEQA is supported by the ESA documents provided in Attachment D, with the following major environmental concerns and mitigation strategies as summarized below:
• Land Use: The proposed above-grade tanks could be visually prominent given the nearby residences and San Francisquito Creek. Visual impacts would be reduced through landscaped 275
Path: C:\Users\cpittner\Desktop\EPA MODEL\EPA_WSMP_MODEL_20260623.aprx Legend
Fire Flow with Maximum Day Demands
Site 1
DRAFT
±
0 1,000 2,000 4,000
US Feet
TU
TU
TU
%9 %9 %9
%9
Pad D
Donohoe
Site 1
Available Fire Flow Below
Requirement
> 4,000
2,000 - 4,000
1,500 - 2,000
1,250 - 1,500
<1,000
Available Fire Flow (gpm)
AExisting PRV
%9 Existing SFPUC Turnout
Existing Infrastructure
Notes
1. All locations are approximate.
2. Available fire flow is the flow at the hydrant
that does not cause pressures to drop below 20
psi at any other service connection locations.
3. Gloria Way Well is assumed to be offline.
Abbreviations
gpm = gallons per minute
PRV = pressure regulating valve
psi = pounds per square inch
SFPUC = San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
Sources
1. Street map provided by ArcGIS online.
TU Existing Tank
City of East Palo Alto
East Palo Alto, CA
July 2026
EKI C40163.00
Figure 1
Existing Pipes
TU Proposed Tank
276
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
screening, neutral-colored coatings and/or architectural treatments, and shielded security lighting. The site is zoned R-MD-1 and would require a Conditional Use Permit. • Construction Concerns: Construction could temporarily affect nearby residences through dust, diesel emissions, and noise from grading, compaction, and trenching. These impacts would be addressed through standard construction best management practices, daytime construction hours, and additional analysis or mitigation as required during CEQA review. • Biological Resources: Up to approximately 15 trees may require removal. Although ESA did not identify direct impacts to San Francisquito Creek or sensitive species within the creek, tree removal would need to comply with the City’s Tree Ordinance. Pre-construction nesting bird surveys and avoidance buffers may also be required if work occurs during nesting season. • Cultural Resources: The site has a high sensitivity for buried pre-contact archaeological resources.
If the site is advanced, future CEQA review should identify appropriate protection measures, which may include additional investigation, construction monitoring, procedures for unexpected discoveries, and tribal consultation.
• Geology and Water Quality: The site is within a mapped liquefaction zone and is located near San Francisquito Creek. A site-specific geotechnical investigation would be required to confirm foundation requirements, and construction would require erosion-control and stormwater best management practices to prevent impacts to nearby surface waters.
Site 1: Qualitative Evaluation
The Woodland Avenue site can accommodate approximately 3 MG through either a dual-tank configuration or less storage using a single larger tank, providing flexibility to phase construction and tailor the project to the City’s storage needs. A dual-tank configuration would provide greater operational flexibility by allowing one tank to remain in service during inspection or maintenance. However, the triangular parcel limits tank arrangement, construction staging, and long-term maintenance access compared with more regularly shaped sites. Due to the elevated groundwater table, anticipated at approximately 5 to 10 feet below ground surface, the tank should be constructed above grade rather than buried or partially buried.
Implementation would require acquisition of the privately owned property and a Conditional Use Permit.
The site is also constrained by nearby industrial users in the City of East Palo Alto, residences in the City of Palo Alto to the south, San Francisquito Creek, and U.S. Highway 101, which increase the importance of visual screening, noise control, drainage, and construction-access planning. Liquefaction, creekadjacent conditions, and potential flood exposure would require further geotechnical and civil evaluation.
Overall, the site provides substantial storage capacity in the southern portion of the City, but property acquisition and the constrained parcel geometry represent significant implementation considerationsthat require more detailed investigation.
Site 2: 2474 Pulgas Avenue (Former Library Site)
This proposed site is located at 2474 Pulgas Avenue near the eastern boundary of East Palo Alto, approximately 250 feet southeast of the intersection of Bay Road and Pulgas Avenue. The site consists of four parcels totaling approximately 1.08 acres (47,000 SF). In discussions with the City, this site was reported as being owned by the City, but the City’s online parcel map shows that the owner is DKB Homes LLC. The site was previously identified for construction of a new City library, but the City is now evaluating its library and civic-facility needs through a broader planning process. The site is located within the 277
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
Ravenswood Business District/Four Corners Specific Plan Area. The site’s zoning and land-use designation is shown as Public/Institutional .
The site is generally flat and compact, with a relatively rectangular configuration that is favorable for construction of a single large circular tank. Existing conditions include gravel, bare soil, patches of vegetation, perimeter fencing, and a cleared area in the northern portion of the parcel. EPACENTER Youth Arts and Music Center is located immediately north of the site, industrial uses are located to the east and south, and residences are located approximately 60 feet west and southwest across Pulgas Avenue. The site is also located approximately 750 feet from the Bay Trail and associated tidal-marsh habitat. These surrounding land uses will require consideration of visual compatibility, construction noise, traffic access, and potential environmental constraints.
The proposed tank configurations for the 2474 Pulgas Avenue site focus on meeting the storage capacity requirement within the parcel in a single tank. As summarized in Table 4, the site can accommodate a single tank with up to approximately 3.0 MG of storage.
Table 4 – Tank Configuration Dimensions Alternatives for Site 2 Tank Diameter (ft) Height (ft) Capacity (MG)
Primary 142 35 3.0
As shown in the draft site plan, see Figure B in Attachment C, the layout maintains an assumed 20-foot setback from the property lines and includes a 10-foot perimeter tree-screening strip for visual buffering.
Supporting infrastructure includes a 450 SF pump station/electrical building and a 100 SF generator area along the southern boundary. Access would be provided from Pulgas Avenue near the southwestern corner of the site. The plan also includes connections to the existing 8-inch water main in Pulgas Avenue.
A smaller tank configuration may also be feasible if the City elects to distribute storage among multiple sites, but this alternative has not been developed in the current conceptual layout.
Site 2: Modeling Results
Site 2 was modeled with a tank water surface approximately 30 feet above surrounding grade. The pump station was modeled with a discharge head of 138 feet, corresponding to a target discharge pressure of approximately 59.7 psi. These operating assumptions were selected to provide a generally consistent basis for comparing hydraulic performance among the five sites.
As shown on Figure 2, under future maximum-day-demand plus fire-flow conditions, 90 of the 106 hydrants that failed to meet their fire flow criteria in the baseline scenario meet their criteria with Site 2.
Overall, 308 of the 325 modeled hydrants meet their fire flow criteria, while 17 remain deficient. Relative to the recommended-CIP scenario, Site 2 provides an aggregate available-fire-flow increase of approximately 19,000 gpm across matching hydrants, the smallest increase among the five sites. Available fire flow increases at 202 hydrants. The results indicate that Site 2 provides meaningful hydraulic support, but the least overall systemwide benefit of the alternatives evaluated. No additional off-site transmission main was identified in the current scenario, although the capacity of the existing 8-inch connection should be confirmed at the full pump station flow.
278
Path: C:\Users\cpittner\Desktop\EPA MODEL\EPA_WSMP_MODEL_20260623.aprx Legend
Fire Flow with Maximum Day Demands
Site 2
DRAFT
±
0 1,000 2,000 4,000
US Feet
TU
TU
TU
%9 %9 %9
%9
Pad D
Donohoe
Site 2
Available Fire Flow Below
Requirement
AExisting PRV
%9 Existing SFPUC Turnout
Existing Infrastructure
Notes
1. All locations are approximate.
2. Available fire flow is the flow at the hydrant
that does not cause pressures to drop below 20
psi at any other service connection locations.
3. Gloria Way Well is assumed to be offline.
Abbreviations
gpm = gallons per minute
PRV = pressure regulating valve
psi = pounds per square inch
SFPUC = San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
Sources
1. Street map provided by ArcGIS online.
TU Existing Tank
City of East Palo Alto
East Palo Alto, CA
July 2026
EKI C40163.00
Figure 2
Existing Pipes
TU Proposed Tank
> 4,000
2,000 - 4,000
1,500 - 2,000
1,250 - 1,500
<1,000
Available Fire Flow (gpm)
279
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
Site 2: CEQA
Project feasibility regarding CEQA is supported by the ESA documents provided in Attachment D, with the following major environmental concerns and mitigation strategies as summarized below:
• Land Use: The proposed above-grade tank could be visually prominent given the nearby residences and the adjacent EPACENTER Youth Arts and Music Center. Visual impacts would be reduced through landscaped screening, neutral-colored coatings and/or architectural treatments, and shielded security lighting. The site is zoned Public/Institutional and would require a Conditional Use Permit.
• Construction Concerns: Construction could temporarily affect nearby residences and community uses through dust, diesel emissions, and noise from grading, compaction, and trenching. These impacts would be addressed through standard construction best management practices, daytime construction hours, and additional analysis or mitigation as required during CEQA review. • Biological Resources: The site includes vegetation and clusters of palm trees that may require removal. ESA did not identify impacts to nearby tidal-marsh habitat or nesting rail species due to the distance between the site and the Bay Trail. Tree removal would need to comply with the City’s Tree Ordinance, and pre-construction nesting bird surveys and avoidance buffers may be required if work occurs during nesting season.
• Cultural Resources: The site has a moderate sensitivity for buried pre-contact archaeological resources. If the site is advanced, future CEQA review should identify appropriate protection measures, which may include additional investigation, construction monitoring, procedures for unexpected discoveries, and tribal consultation.
• Geology and Water Quality: The site is within a mapped liquefaction zone and is located near the San Francisco Bay margins, where shallow groundwater may be encountered during construction.
A site-specific geotechnical investigation would be required to confirm foundation requirements, and construction may require dewatering, erosion-control measures, and stormwater best management practices.
• Hazardous Materials: The site is listed as an open site-assessment case due to known arsenic contamination in soil and groundwater in the vicinity. If the site is advanced, additional investigation would be required to characterize contamination and determine appropriate procedures for soil handling, groundwater management, worker protection, and disposal.
Site 2: Qualitative Evaluation
The 2474 Pulgas Avenue site has a compact, generally rectangular configuration that can accommodate the full 3 MG storage objective within a single tank. A single-tank installation would simplify piping, controls, and routine facility operations relative to a multi-tank site. However, the tank would occupy most of the parcel, and major tank maintenance would require the entire storage facility to be taken out of service. Due to the elevated groundwater table, anticipated at approximately 5 to 10 feet below ground surface, the tank should be constructed above grade rather than buried or partially buried.
Ownership should be confirmed before the site is advanced, as available information regarding City or private ownership is inconsistent. The City should also consider the opportunity cost of using a site 280
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
previously reserved for a public or civic use. The primary technical concern is known arsenic contamination in soil and groundwater, which could materially affect investigation, excavation, dewatering, disposal, and worker-protection requirements. Nearby residences and EPACENTER would also require visual and construction-impact mitigation. This site is across the street from many multi-family residences and will have to contend with the direct visual impact during the CEQA and planning process. The City could consider a smaller tank (e.g., 1.5 MG) which would allow the tank to either be narrower or shorter in height, and thus pose less of a visual impact to nearby residents. The site offers efficient storage capacity, but its hazardous-materials situation presents a potentially significant cost and schedule risk.
Site 3: Bell Street Park
This proposed site is located within Bell Street Park on the larger parcel addressed as 2180 Euclid Avenue.
The parcel is approximately 4.72 acres (205,500 SF) and is currently owned by the City of East Palo Alto.
The site’s zoning and land-use designations are PR and Parks/Recreation/Conservation, respectively. The larger parcel includes Bell Street Park, the Lewis and Joan Platt East Palo Alto Family YMCA, the East Palo Alto Senior Center, a skate park, a playground, and other community-serving uses.
The proposed tank location is within the northwestern portion of the park, near the existing internal access road behind the YMCA. Unlike the other finalist sites, the Bell Street Park concept is intended to retain some of the site’s recreational function by integrating a partially buried concrete tank worked into the park landscape. The surrounding area is already developed with community facilities, mixed commercial and residential uses, and public open space. Euclid Avenue and the Ravenswood City School District property are located to the west, University Avenue is located to the east, and residential uses are located within the surrounding neighborhood. Because the tank would be installed within an existing public park, the primary layout considerations are preservation of usable park space, visual integration, maintenance access, construction staging, and compatibility with adjacent community uses.
The proposed tank configuration for Bell Street Park is summarized in Table 5. The concept includes a single prestressed concrete tank with approximately 0.66 MG of storage. The tank would be partially buried approximately 15 feet below existing grade, reducing its above-grade visual profile.
Table 5 – Tank Configuration Dimensions Alternatives for Site 3 Tank Diameter (ft) Height (ft) Capacity (MG)
Primary 80 25 total, 15 ft below
ground 0.66
Site 3: Modeling Results
Site 3 was modeled with a tank water surface approximately 10 feet above surrounding grade to represent the partially buried tank configuration. The pump station was modeled with a discharge head of 133 feet, corresponding to a target discharge pressure of approximately 57.6 psi. These operating assumptions were selected to provide a generally consistent basis for comparing hydraulic performance among the five sites. As shown in the draft site plan, see Figure C in Attachment C, the conceptual layout includes a new 8-inch water line routed through the existing City easement to the distribution system near Euclid Avenue.
As shown on Figure 3, under future maximum-day-demand plus fire-flow conditions, 90 of the 106 hydrants that failed to meet their fire flow criteria in the baseline scenario meet their criteria with Site 3. 281
Path: C:\Users\cpittner\Desktop\EPA MODEL\EPA_WSMP_MODEL_20260623.aprx Legend
Fire Flow with Maximum Day Demands
Site 3
DRAFT
±
0 1,000 2,000 4,000
US Feet
TU
TU
TU
%9 %9 %9
%9
Pad D
Donohoe
Site 3
Available Fire Flow Below
Requirement
AExisting PRV
%9 Existing SFPUC Turnout
Existing Infrastructure
Notes
1. All locations are approximate.
2. Available fire flow is the flow at the hydrant
that does not cause pressures to drop below 20
psi at any other service connection locations.
3. Gloria Way Well is assumed to be offline.
Abbreviations
gpm = gallons per minute
PRV = pressure regulating valve
psi = pounds per square inch
SFPUC = San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
Sources
1. Street map provided by ArcGIS online.
TU Existing Tank
City of East Palo Alto
East Palo Alto, CA
July 2026
EKI C40163.00
Figure 3
Existing Pipes
TU Proposed Tank
> 4,000
2,000 - 4,000
1,500 - 2,000
1,250 - 1,500
<1,000
Available Fire Flow (gpm)
282
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
Overall, 308 of the 325 modeled hydrants meet their fire flow criteria, while 17 remain deficient. Relative to the recommended-CIP scenario, Site 3 provides an aggregate increase of approximately 65,900 gpm in available fire flow across matching hydrants, the second-largest increase among the five sites. Available fire flow increases at 226 hydrants. These results indicate a substantial hydraulic benefit despite the smaller conceptual storage volume at this site. No additional off-site transmission improvement was identified beyond the proposed easement connection and recommended CIPs, although the connection diameter and pump-head requirements should be confirmed during preliminary design.
Site 3: CEQA
Project feasibility regarding CEQA is supported by the ESA documents provided in Attachment D, with the following major environmental concerns and mitigation strategies as summarized below:
• Land Use: The proposed partially buried tank would occupy a portion of an existing public park near a skate park, playground, YMCA, and senior center. The partially buried configuration and landscaped screening would reduce visual impacts and help preserve park functionality. The site is zoned Parks and Recreation and would require an Administrative Use Permit. • Construction Concerns: Construction could temporarily affect park users and nearby community facilities through dust, diesel emissions, noise, and temporary disruption of recreational space.
These impacts would be addressed through standard construction best management practices, daytime construction hours, construction-area controls, and additional analysis or mitigation as required during CEQA review.
• Biological Resources: Mature trees, including oak and palm trees, are present near the proposed tank location and may require removal. ESA did not identify special-status species constraints at the site. Tree removal would need to comply with the City’s Tree Ordinance, and pre-construction nesting bird surveys and avoidance buffers may be required if work occurs during nesting season.
• Cultural Resources: The site has a high sensitivity for buried pre-contact archaeological resources and a moderate sensitivity for historic-era archaeological resources. If the site is advanced, future CEQA review should identify appropriate protection measures, which may include additional investigation, construction monitoring, procedures for unexpected discoveries, and tribal consultation.
• Geology and Water Quality: The site is within a mapped liquefaction zone. Because the proposed tank would be partially buried, a site-specific geotechnical investigation would be required to confirm excavation, groundwater, foundation, and structural requirements.
Construction would also require erosion-control and stormwater best management practices.
Site 3: Qualitative Evaluation
Bell Street Park provides the smallest storage capacity of the finalist sites, approximately 0.66 MG, but the partially buried tank would have a substantially lower visual profile than the above-grade alternatives.
Its inland location also appears less directly exposed to Bay-related sea-level-rise concerns compared to other tank sites, but due to its buried nature would likely be more affected by flooding. Existing internal access and proximity to a distribution main are favorable, although the facility would occupy active parkland near the YMCA, senior center, playground, and skate park. 283
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
The partially buried configuration would require more excavation, below-grade construction, groundwater control, structural design, and long-term drainage maintenance than an at-grade tank.
Access to buried components may also complicate future inspection and rehabilitation. Because the site would still require a pump station, generator, controls, and security improvements despite providing substantially less storage, it is likely to be less efficient on a cost-per-MG and operational basis.
Construction would temporarily disrupt park use, and the site has elevated archaeological sensitivity based on initial CEQA review. Overall, its principal advantage is reduced visual impact rather than storage efficiency.
Site 4: 1266 Beech Street (Future MLK Park)
This proposed site is located at 1266 Beech Street near the eastern boundary of East Palo Alto, adjacent to Martin Luther King Jr. Park and the San Francisco Baylands. The parcel is approximately 1.85 acres (approximately 80,500 SF) and is currently owned by San Mateo County. The site’s zoning and land-use designations are PR and Parks/Recreation/Conservation, respectively. The parcel is currently vacant and has been identified for potential expansion of the adjacent park.
The site is generally flat, vegetated, and rectangular, with sufficient space to accommodate two circular tanks and associated infrastructure. Beech Street forms the northern boundary, Martin Luther King Jr.
Park is located immediately south, residential uses are located to the west and southwest, and the San Francisco Baylands and tidal-marsh habitat are located to the east. Residences are also located approximately 40 feet north of the site across Beech Street. The site’s proximity to existing and planned park uses, nearby residences, shallow groundwater, and environmentally sensitive Baylands will require careful consideration of visual screening, geotechnical design, construction timing, and biologicalresource constraints.
The proposed tank configurations for the 1266 Beech Street site focus on maximizing storage capacity within the parcel while retaining space for supporting infrastructure. As summarized in Table 6, the concept includes two tanks with an approximate total capacity of 3.0 MG.
Table 6 – Tank Configuration Dimensions Alternatives for Site 4 Tank Diameter (ft) Height (ft) Capacity (MG)
Primary 100 37 1.5
Secondary 100 37 1.5
TOTAL 3.0
Site 4: Modeling Results
Site 4 was modeled with a tank water surface approximately 30 feet above surrounding grade. The pump station was modeled with a discharge head of 131 feet, corresponding to a target discharge pressure of approximately 56.7 psi. These operating assumptions were selected to provide a generally consistent basis for comparing hydraulic performance among the five sites. As shown in the draft site plan, see Figure D in Attachment C, the conceptual layout includes connections to the existing 8-inch water main in Beech Street.
As shown on Figure 4, under future maximum-day-demand plus fire-flow conditions, 90 of the 106 hydrants that failed to meet their fire flow criteria in the baseline scenario meet their criteria with Site 4.
Overall, 308 of the 325 modeled hydrants meet their fire flow criteria, while 17 remain deficient. Relative 284
Path: C:\Users\cpittner\Desktop\EPA MODEL\EPA_WSMP_MODEL_20260623.aprx Legend
Fire Flow with Maximum Day Demands
Site 4
DRAFT
±
0 1,000 2,000 4,000
US Feet
TU
TU
TU
%9 %9 %9
%9
Pad D
Donohoe
Site 4
Available Fire Flow Below
Requirement
AExisting PRV
%9 Existing SFPUC Turnout
Existing Infrastructure
Notes
1. All locations are approximate.
2. Available fire flow is the flow at the hydrant
that does not cause pressures to drop below 20
psi at any other service connection locations.
3. Gloria Way Well is assumed to be offline.
Abbreviations
gpm = gallons per minute
PRV = pressure regulating valve
psi = pounds per square inch
SFPUC = San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
Sources
1. Street map provided by ArcGIS online.
TU Existing Tank
City of East Palo Alto
East Palo Alto, CA
July 2026
EKI C40163.00
Figure 4
Existing Pipes
TU Proposed Tank
> 4,000
2,000 - 4,000
1,500 - 2,000
1,250 - 1,500
<1,000
Available Fire Flow (gpm)
285
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
to the recommended-CIP scenario, Site 4 provides an aggregate available-fire-flow increase of approximately 23,350 gpm across matching hydrants, ranking fourth among the five sites. Available fire flow increases at 260 hydrants, indicating a relatively broad distribution of moderate hydraulic benefit across the system.
Site 4: CEQA
Project feasibility regarding CEQA is supported by the ESA documents provided in Attachment D, with the following major environmental concerns and mitigation strategies as summarized below:
• Land Use: The proposed above-grade tanks could be visually prominent given the nearby residences, planned park use, and adjacent San Francisco Baylands. Visual impacts would be reduced through landscaped screening, neutral-colored coatings and/or architectural treatments, and shielded security lighting. The site is zoned Parks and Recreation and would require an Administrative Use Permit.
• Construction Concerns: Construction could temporarily affect nearby residences and park users through dust, diesel emissions, and noise from grading, compaction, and trenching. These impacts would be addressed through standard construction best management practices, daytime construction hours, and additional analysis or mitigation as required during CEQA review.
• Biological Resources: The site is located approximately 200 feet from tidal-marsh habitat that may support the federally endangered and California fully protected Ridgway’s Rail.
Construction within 700 feet of nesting-rail habitat would be restricted between January 15 and August 31 unless protocol-level surveys are completed with negative results. Pre-construction nesting bird surveys and avoidance buffers may also be required. • Cultural Resources: The site has a moderate sensitivity for buried pre-contact archaeological resources. If the site is advanced, future CEQA review should identify appropriate protection measures, which may include additional investigation, construction monitoring, procedures for unexpected discoveries, and tribal consultation.
• Geology and Water Quality: The site is within a mapped liquefaction zone and is located near the San Francisco Bay margins, where shallow groundwater may be encountered during construction. A site-specific geotechnical investigation would be required to confirm foundation requirements, and construction may require dewatering, erosion-control measures, and stormwater best management practices.
Site 4: Qualitative Evaluation
The Beech Street site can accommodate up to approximately 3.0 MG in two tanks. This configuration provides operational redundancy, allows one tank to remain available during maintenance, and could potentially support phased construction. The regular parcel geometry and direct access from Beech Street are favorable for layout and operations. However, the property is owned by San Mateo County, so acquisition, transfer, or another interagency property agreement would be required. Due to the elevated groundwater table, anticipated at approximately 5 to 10 feet below ground surface, the tank should be constructed above grade rather than buried or partially buried.
The tanks would occupy land identified for future expansion of MLK Park and would block the view of many nearby residences, requiring coordination with the park design and substantial landscape screening. 286
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
Its location near the Baylands presents significant geotechnical and resilience considerations, including shallow groundwater, liquefaction, potential future flooding or sea-level-rise exposure, and the need to protect critical electrical and mechanical equipment. Seasonal restrictions associated with nearby Ridgway’s Rail habitat could also constrain the construction schedule. The site provides substantial and operationally flexible storage, but park impacts, property coordination, and Bay-adjacent environmental constraints are significant.
Site 5: Parcel at the End of Pulgas Avenue (Future Athletic Field) This proposed site is located near the northeastern boundary of East Palo Alto on a parcel planned for future athletic fields as part of the EPA Waterfront Athletic Fields redevelopment. The design review application for this site was submitted in March 2025, and the project status is currently under review by the City.
The larger parcel is approximately 4.68 acres, and the proposed tank site would occupy approximately
0.87 acre (38,000 SF) within the northwestern portion of the parcel near parking lots which will be installed with the athletic field. The parcel is currently owned by Bella Vista Capital Inc. and Sycamore Real Estate Investment LLC submitted the plans for administrative design review. The site is located within the Ravenswood Business District/Four Corners Specific Plan Area. In the Ravenswood Business District specific plan, it states in policy UTIL-1.4, that they will “partner with a developer to build one or more large (1.5 MGD+) water storage tank(s) within the Plan Area, with a likely location being at the end of Demeter and Purdue Streets”. Its zoning and land-use designation is Waterfront Office (High-Intensity Office/Lab/Industrial).
The proposed tank location is within a larger waterfront parcel that is being evaluated for recreational use. The site is bounded by existing industrial uses to the south and west and open space and tidal-marsh habitat to the north and east. The Bay Trail and Ravenswood Open Space Preserve are located approximately 650 feet northeast of the site, while the nearest residences are located approximately 750 feet west. The site currently includes an existing warehouse or industrial structure, and though the preliminary plans do not specify, it is assumed demolition would be completed as part of the athletic-field project or the future tank project. The site’s proximity to the Baylands may require careful consideration of shallow groundwater, liquefaction, biological resources, construction timing, and long-term compatibility with planned recreational uses.
The proposed tank configurations for the future athletic-field site focus on maximizing storage capacity within the available portion of the parcel while allowing the broader recreational project to proceed. As summarized in Table 7, the concept includes two tanks with an approximate total capacity of 3.0 MG.
Table 7 – Tank Configuration Dimensions Alternatives for Site 5 Tank Diameter (ft) Height (ft) Capacity (MG)
Primary 100 37 1.5
Secondary 100 37 1.5
TOTAL 3.0
Site 5: Modeling Results
Site 5 was modeled with a tank water surface approximately 30 feet above surrounding grade. The pump station was modeled with a discharge head of 141 feet, corresponding to a target discharge pressure of 287
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
approximately 61.0 psi. These operating assumptions were selected to provide a generally consistent basis for comparing hydraulic performance among the five sites. As shown in the draft site plan, see Figure E in Attachment C, the conceptual layout includes an approximately 250-foot connection to a proposed 12- inch water main in Pulgas Avenue. In order to model this scenario, EKI included a new 12-inch water main approximately 1,200 linear feet (LF) in length along Pulgas Ave, then connecting to the northwest at the intersection of Purdue and Illinois St. This pipeline is assumed to be developer funded as a part of the Ravenswood Business Development and Athletic Field construction.
As shown on Figure 5, under future maximum-day-demand plus fire-flow conditions, 90 of the 106 hydrants that failed to meet their fire flow criteria in the baseline scenario meet their criteria with Site 5.
Overall, 308 of the 325 modeled hydrants meet their fire flow criteria, while 17 remain deficient. Relative to the recommended-CIP scenario, Site 5 provides an aggregate increase of approximately 54,200 gpm in available fire flow across matching hydrants, ranking third among the five sites. Available fire flow increases at 278 hydrants, the largest number among the five tank alternatives.
Site 5: CEQA
Project feasibility regarding CEQA is supported by the ESA documents provided in Attachment D, with the following major environmental concerns and mitigation strategies as summarized below:
• Land Use: The proposed above-grade tanks could be visually prominent given the adjacent planned athletic field, nearby open space, and proximity to the San Francisco Baylands. Visual impacts would be reduced through landscaped screening, neutral-colored coatings and/or architectural treatments, and shielded security lighting. The site is located within the Ravenswood Business District/Four Corners Specific Plan Area and would require a Conditional Use Permit.
• Construction Concerns: Construction could temporarily affect nearby uses through dust, diesel emissions, noise, and temporary traffic disruptions. Demolition of an existing warehouse or industrial structure may also be required before tank construction. These impacts would be addressed through standard construction best management practices, daytime construction hours, and additional analysis or mitigation as required during CEQA review. • Biological Resources: The site is located within approximately 700 feet of tidal-marsh habitat that may support the federally and state endangered and California fully protected Ridgway’s Rail. Construction within 700 feet of nesting-rail habitat would be restricted between January 15 and August 31 unless protocol-level surveys are completed with negative results. Preconstruction nesting bird surveys and avoidance buffers may also be required. • Cultural Resources: The site has a high sensitivity for buried pre-contact archaeological resources. If the site is advanced, future CEQA review should identify appropriate protection measures, which may include additional investigation, construction monitoring, procedures for unexpected discoveries, and tribal consultation.
• Geology and Water Quality: The site is within a mapped liquefaction zone and is located near the San Francisco Bay margins, where shallow groundwater may be encountered during construction. A site-specific geotechnical investigation would be required to confirm foundation requirements, and construction may require dewatering, erosion-control measures, and stormwater best management practices.
288
Path: C:\Users\cpittner\Desktop\EPA MODEL\EPA_WSMP_MODEL_20260623.aprx Legend
Fire Flow with Maximum Day Demands
Site 5
DRAFT
±
0 1,000 2,000 4,000
US Feet
TU
TU
TU
%9 %9 %9
%9
Pad D
Donohoe
Site 5
Available Fire Flow Below
Requirement
AExisting PRV
%9 Existing SFPUC Turnout
Existing Infrastructure
Notes
1. All locations are approximate.
2. Available fire flow is the flow at the hydrant
that does not cause pressures to drop below 20
psi at any other service connection locations.
3. Gloria Way Well is assumed to be offline.
Abbreviations
gpm = gallons per minute
PRV = pressure regulating valve
psi = pounds per square inch
SFPUC = San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
Sources
1. Street map provided by ArcGIS online.
TU Existing Tank
City of East Palo Alto
East Palo Alto, CA
July 2026
EKI C40163.00
Figure 5
Existing Pipes
TU Proposed Tank
> 4,000
2,000 - 4,000
1,500 - 2,000
1,250 - 1,500
<1,000
Available Fire Flow (gpm)
289
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
Site 5: Qualitative Evaluation
The future athletic-field site can accommodate up to approximately 3.0 MG in two tanks, providing similar phasing, redundancy, and maintenance flexibility to the Beech Street alternative. The surrounding industrial and open-space uses and greater separation from residences may reduce direct neighborhood impacts compared with several other sites. However, the facility would need to be integrated into the planned athletic-field development, including coordination of tank access, parking, screening, utility connections, and construction staging. Due to the elevated groundwater table, anticipated at approximately 5 to 10 feet below ground surface, the tank should be constructed above grade rather than buried or partially buried.
The property is privately owned, and implementation would depend on acquisition, dedication, or another agreement with the property owner and developer. Existing structures may also require demolition, and the project schedule could be dependent on the timing and design of the athletic-field development. As with the Beech Street site, proximity to the bay creates concerns related to shallow groundwater, liquefaction, sea-level-rise resilience, and seasonal restrictions for sensitive bird habitat.
The site provides substantial storage and relatively favorable separation from residential uses, but property control and coordination with the proposed development create schedule and implementation uncertainty.
Site 6: 1798 Bay Road (Tanklage Site)
During the detailed evaluation, Bell Street Park has been found to offer less overall benefit than initially anticipated due to its limited storage capacity and site constraints. Following additional discussions with City staff, the Tanklage property has been added for preliminary review as another City-owned site that may provide greater storage capacity and implementation flexibility.
The Tanklage property is located at 1798 Bay Road (APN 063-231-250) within the Ravenswood Business District/Four Corners Specific Plan Area. The approximately 1.3-acre property is owned by the City and is subject to a restriction requiring its use for governmental or other public purposes. The site has historically supported public and community-serving uses, including the former Ravenswood Family Health Center, the City’s RV Safe Parking Program, temporary housing units, and construction parking and staging for the nearby Colibri Commons affordable housing project.
The parcel has an irregular interior-block configuration with limited frontage on Bay Road. An ingress/egress easement serving an adjacent property encumbers a portion of the site and limits development near the street frontage. Existing improvements include paved parking, fencing, lighting, utilities, and temporary modular structures. City staff has indicated that the temporary structures are no longer actively occupied, although their removal or relocation and the current status of other temporary site uses should be confirmed before advancing the property.
As summarized in Table 8, a preliminary planning-level fit assessment indicates that the property may accommodate two approximately 100-foot-diameter tanks with a combined storage capacity of up to approximately 3 MG. The layout may also retain a limited area for City equipment storage or corporationyard-related functions. The final usable area will depend on verification of the access easement, propertyline setbacks, landscape screening, tank dimensions, pump station and generator requirements, vehicle circulation, and construction staging. Due to anticipated shallow groundwater conditions in this portion of the City, the tanks are assumed to be constructed above grade rather than buried or partially buried. 290
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
Table 8 – Tank Configuration Dimensions Alternatives for Site 6 Tank Diameter (ft) Height (ft) Capacity (MG)
Primary 100 37 1.5
Secondary 100 37 1.5
TOTAL 3.0
Site 6: Modeling Results
The Tanklage property was identified for inclusion following completion of the detailed hydraulic modeling for the original five alternatives. Accordingly, a site-specific hydraulic evaluation has not been completed for this draft, however, the hydraulic benefits are likely similar to Site 2 and 5, given Tanklage Site’s the proximity to those other sites.
Site 6: CEQA
The Tanklage property was not included in ESA’s environmental screening of the original five sites. Based on an initial review on the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board’s GeoTracker website, the site does not appear to have any environmental contamination concerns, though there is a closed site directly adjacent and east of the property.
The Long-Range Property Management Plan indicates that the property was cleared and leveled in 2001, including removal of debris, concrete, rebar, tires, and soil, and states that the property was subsequently believed to be free of environmental contamination (EPA, 2014). However, these records do not constitute environmental clearance for a permanent water-storage facility.
Future evaluation should include confirmation of zoning and permitting requirements, a current Phase I environmental site assessment, a geotechnical investigation, and review of visual, noise, traffic, culturalresource, groundwater, liquefaction, construction, and neighboring land-use considerations.
Site 6: Qualitative Evaluation
The Tanklage property appears to be a promising alternative because it is owned by the City, is restricted to a civic/public use, and may accommodate up to approximately 3 MG of storage without displacing an active public park. City ownership avoids the risk associated with land acquisition, and a two-tank configuration could provide operational redundancy and allow one tank to remain available during maintenance of the other tank. The property is also relatively large so the City will likely be able to retain limited space for City storage or related operational uses.
Site-specific hydraulic modeling, environmental screening, conceptual design, and cost estimating are required before Tanklage can be compared at the same level of detail as the other finalist sites.
OPINIONS OF PROBABLE COST
The section presents information related to the development of the Project Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (OPCC) for each retained alternative. 291
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
Approach to OPCCs
EKI’s approach to providing an accurate OPCC is to develop cost estimates that reflect, as closely as practicable, what we believe will be an actual successful bid price. The subsections to follow will explain the class of estimate, relevant assumptions, and exclusions.
Class of Estimate
The OPCC estimate provided herein is considered a Class 5 estimate according to the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE) International Cost Estimate Classification System (AACE International, 2020) as shown in Table 9. Due to the project design level and the volatile economic climate, we believe that the contingency should be at 30% to cover the estimating and scope contingency for all Project costs.
Contingency specifically includes:
• Errors and omissions in the estimating process.
• Variability associated with quantifying the level of effort. • Structural design requirements or construction impacts that may be identified in future geotechnical analyses.
• Design that may not be complete enough to determine final quantities. • Some items or costs that are currently estimated by factoring. • Material and equipment costs that may vary from those in the estimate due to inflationary reasons and market conditions.
• Changes in the actual quantities that may change from that assumed in the estimate.
Contingency specifically excludes:
• Significant changes in scope.
• Major unexpected work stoppages (strikes, etc.).
• Disasters (hurricanes, tornados, etc.).
• Excessive, unexpected inflation.
• Excessive, unexpected currency fluctuations.
292
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
Table 9 – Estimate Classification Matrix
Estimate
Class
Level of
Project
Definition
Expressed as %
of Complete
Project
Definition
End Usage
Typical Purpose of
Estimate
Methodology
Typical Estimating
Techniques
Expected
Accuracy Range
At 90% Confidence
Level
Typical
Contingency
To Achieve 50%
Probability of
Overrun/
Underrun
5 <= 5%
Preliminary
Project Screening
Estimate, Capital
Budget OOM Estimate,
Alternate Schemes
Evaluation, Strategic
Analysis
Capacity Factored,
Parametric Models,
Judgment, Analogy,
Historical Project
Comparison, Broad Unit
Cost Data
Low: ‐20% to ‐50%
High: +30% to
+100%
25% to 40%
4 5% to 20%
Preliminary Project
Estimate, Reality Check
Estimate, Alternate
Schemes Evaluation,
Feasibility Study
Equipment Factored
Parametric Models,
Historical Relationship
Factors, Broad Unit Cost
Data
Low: ‐20% to ‐30%
High: +20% to +50%
10% to 25%
3 20% to
60%
Project Funding
Estimate, Fair Price
Check Estimate,
Alternate Schemes
Evaluation
Semi‐Detailed Unit Costs
with Assembly Level Line
Items by Trade, Historical
Relationship Factors
Low: ‐10% to ‐20%
High: +10% to +30%
5% to 15%
2 60% to
99%
Project Funding
Estimate, Control
Estimate, Bid Estimate
Detailed Estimating Data
by Trade, with Detailed
Takeoff Quantities
Low: ‐5% to ‐15%
High: +5% to +20%
5% to 15% of
unexpected
funds
1 90 to 100%
Firm Bid Estimate Detailed Estimating Data
by Trade with Detailed
Firm Takeoff Quantities
Low: ‐3% to ‐10%
High: +3% to +15%
3% to 10% of
unexpected
funds
Source: Modified Table 1 from AACE International, 2020.
Assumptions
The bulleted list below captures EKI’s assumptions used to create the OPCCs:
• The OPCCs are assumed to be an indication of fair market value and not necessarily a predictor of lowest bid.
• Competitive bid conditions will prevail at tender (e.g. +3 bidders). Actual bid prices may increase for fewer bidders or decrease for a greater number of bidders. • Bidders will develop competitive proposals with regards to materials pricing and labor productivity, and will not include allowances for changes, extra work, unforeseen conditions or any other unplanned costs.
• Contractor has free and clear access, easement, and/or right-of-way to work. 293
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
• Stable market conditions will prevail without significant geopolitical events or economic disruptions.
• Public and/or main access roads are suitable and available throughout construction. • All costs are presented in April 2026 dollars.
• Soft costs were estimated based on percentages of total direct costs, as follows:
- Engineering = 10% based on size and complexity of the project. - Construction Management = 10%
- Environmental Documentation and Permitting = 2%
- Administration = 0.5%
• Subtotals and totals are rounded up to the nearest $1,000.
Exclusions and Exceptions
EKI did not include the following details in the provided OPCCs:
• Property acquisition costs and any necessary temporary construction easements and permanent utility easement costs.
• Non-conventional environmental mitigation measures.
• Non-conventional heritage and cultural mitigation measures. • Deep foundation design or significant earthwork due to poor site conditions Planning-level OPCCs were developed for the steel and prestressed concrete tank configurations evaluated at each site, included in Attachment E. Tank-package costs are based on project-specific budgetary pricing provided by DN Tanks for AWWA D110 prestressed concrete tanks and by Paso Robles Tanks, a welded-steel tank manufacturer, adjusted where necessary to reflect the conceptual tank dimensions and number of tanks proposed at each site. The estimates also include planning-level allowances for site work, piping and appurtenances, electrical improvements, contractor markups and contingency, and engineering and other soft costs. Property acquisition and site-specific deep foundations or ground improvements are excluded.
A summary of the retained storage project alternatives is shown in Table 10. In addition to the tank cost, the total site cost includes the various incidental costs associated with each site including mobilization, site work, the booster pumping station, and markups. However, these costs do not include costs for property acquisition. The table also includes an annualized tank-maintenance reserve to illustrate the principal long-term cost difference between steel and prestressed concrete construction. The steel-tank allowance assumes interior and exterior recoating approximately every 20 years and is scaled based on the conceptual coated surface area at each site. The concrete-tank allowance assumes approximately $130,000 per tank every 20 years for inspection, washing, and routine maintenance based on DN Tanks recommendations. These values represent annualized capital-reserve allowances rather than anticipated annual expenditures and do not include operation or maintenance of the pump station, generator, electrical equipment, controls, or other site facilities.
The OPCCs generally reflect the maximum storage volume that can reasonably be accommodated at each site. The City may instead elect to distribute the required storage among two or more sites to improve 294
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
resilience, operational flexibility, and visual compatibility. A distributed-storage program would likely have a higher total cost than a single-site alternative as the smaller tanks have a higher unit cost per gallon.
Accordingly, the site costs should be reviewed if the City prefers a distributed-storage approach.
Table 10 - Storage Cost Summary
Site Volume
(MG)
Steel Tank Concrete Tank
Total Site
Cost with
Steel Tank
Steel
Cost Per
Gallon
Tank
O&M
Annual
($/yr)
Total Site
Cost with
Concrete
Tank
Concrete
Cost Per
Gallon
Tank O&M
Annual ($/yr)
1 2.0 & 1.0 $10,942,000 $3.6 $130,000 $17,518,000 $5.8 $20,000 2 3.0 $8,978,000 $3.0 $100,000 $13,603,000 $4.5 $20,000 3 0.66 -- -- -- $7,828,000 $11.9 $10,000
4 1.5 & 1.5 $10,546,000 $3.5 $130,000 $17,524,000 $5.8 $20,000 5 1.5 & 1.5 $10,508,000 $3.5 $130,000 $17,486,000 $5.8 $20,000 6 (a) 1.5 & 1.5 $10,500,000 $3.5 $130,000 $17,500,000 $5.8 $20,000 Notes:
a. A detailed cost estimate has not been prepared for Site 6. However, it is assumed that it will be similar to the cost estimates of the other tank sites that include two 1.5 MG tanks (Sites 4 and 5).
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the detailed evaluation, EKI recommends that the City advance Sites 1, 2, and 5 for further consideration and conceptual visualization. These three sites provide a reasonable range of implementation options and collectively represent the strongest balance of storage capacity, hydraulic benefit, constructability, land-use compatibility, and long-term operational value.
Site 3
Site 3 at Bell Street Park is not recommended for further consideration under the current conceptual layout. Although the site passed the initial screening and provides a meaningful hydraulic benefit, the available area only accommodates approximately 0.66 MG of storage, substantially less than originally anticipated and considerably less than the other finalist sites. The project would still require a pump station, generator, electrical controls, security improvements, excavation, and other supporting infrastructure, resulting in a relatively high cost per unit of storage.
The proposed facility would also occupy and temporarily disrupt an existing public recreational resource.
Its partially buried configuration would reduce visual impacts, but would increase excavation, structural, groundwater-control, and long-term drainage requirements. The site may warrant reconsideration if the existing skate park is removed or the broader park layout is substantially modified, creating sufficient 295
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
space for a larger and more cost-effective storage facility. Under existing conditions, however, the limited storage capacity does not justify the anticipated cost and community impacts.
Site 4
Site 4 at the future MLK Park is technically feasible and can accommodate approximately 3 MG of storage in a two-tank configuration. The site also provides broad hydraulic improvement and operational redundancy. However, above-grade tanks at this location would be highly visible from nearby residences, the future park, and the Bayfront. The facilities could affect views toward the Baylands and may generate substantial community concern.
Site 4 would also reduce land available for future park use and is subject to shallow groundwater, liquefaction, sensitive-habitat constraints, and potential seasonal construction restrictions. For these reasons, Site 4 is not recommended as one of the three preferred alternatives, but could be retained as a secondary option if property, environmental, or implementation constraints make one of the preferred sites infeasible.
Preferred Sites
Site 1 provides the greatest modeled hydraulic benefit and can accommodate approximately 3 MG of storage, although property acquisition, parcel geometry, creek proximity, and nearby residential uses increase implementation complexity. The site should be advanced because of its strong hydraulic performance and location in the southern portion of the distribution system.
Site 2 offers a compact site capable of accommodating the full storage objective within a single tank. Its industrial setting and apparent availability for public use make it one of the more straightforward locations from a land-use perspective. The principal uncertainty is the known arsenic contamination in soil and groundwater, which should be investigated before the City makes a significant commitment to the site.
Site 5 provides substantial storage capacity, strong and broadly distributed hydraulic benefit, and greater separation from existing residences than several other alternatives. It should be advanced in coordination with the future athletic-field development to confirm property control, tank placement, access, screening, demolition responsibilities, and compatibility with the recreational layout.
With Bell Street Park no longer recommended for advancement due to its limited storage capacity, relatively high cost, and impacts to active park uses, the Tanklage property presents a potentially stronger City-owned alternative for continued consideration. EKI recommends advancing the Tanklage site for a detailed hydraulic assessment, preliminary CEQA screening, conceptual layout, and opinion of probable cost comparable to the evaluations completed for the other finalist sites. 296
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
Table 11 – Site Criteria Summary
Site Hydraulic Benefit CEQA Qualitative Summary Recommendation Site 1:
Woodland
Avenue
Greatest
aggregate fireflow
improvement.
Creek proximity,
nearby residences,
liquefaction, and high
archaeological
sensitivity.
Strong hydraulic benefit
and substantial capacity
but requires private
acquisition.
Advance for further
consideration.
Site 2:
Pulgas
Avenue
Same overall fireflow
improvement,
but lowest
aggregate
improvement.
Known arsenic
contamination, nearby
residences and
community uses, and
shallow groundwater.
Can accommodate the
full storage need on a
compact site in a
predominantly industrial
setting. Contamination is
the primary risk.
Advance for further
consideration.
Site 3: Bell
Street Park
Same overall fireflow
improvement.
Existing park impacts,
high archaeological
sensitivity,
liquefaction, and
below-grade
construction concerns.
Low storage volume and
impacts an existing park.
Remove from
consideration unless
the park layout
changes
substantially.
Site 4:
Future MLK
Park
Broad but
moderate
systemwide fireflow
improvement.
Baylands habitat,
Ridgway’s rail
restrictions,
liquefaction, shallow
groundwater, and park
impacts.
Technically feasible with
substantial capacity, but
visually prominent and
likely to affect Bayfront
views and future park
use.
Retain only as a
secondary
alternative.
Site 5:
Future
Athletic
Field
Third-highest
aggregate
improvement and
broadest
distribution of
improved
hydrants.
Baylands habitat,
seasonal construction
restrictions,
liquefaction, shallow
groundwater, and
archaeological
sensitivity.
Substantial capacity,
favorable separation
from residences, and
good hydraulic
performance; however,
this site requires
coordination with the
athletic-field
development.
Advance for further
consideration.
Site 6:
Tanklage
Site
-- -- -- Proposed to be
added to detailed
evaluation
297
City of East Palo Alto
10 July 2026
Attachments
Attachment A – Preliminary Site Screening Map
Attachment B – Preliminary Site Screening Matrix
Attachment C – Preliminary Tank Siting Conceptual Layouts Attachment D – East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Attachment E – Site Specific Opinions of Probable Cost
References
EPA, 2014. City of East Palo Alto Successor Agency. Long-Range Property Management Plan. October 2014.
EPA, 2021. City of East Palo Alto. East Palo Alto City Facilities Master Plan Report. 2021.
EPA, 2023a. City of East Palo Alto. Water System Master Plan. March 2023, https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/public_works/project/21359/epa _wsmpreport_update_2023-03-22_wappendices_ver2.pdf
EPA, 2023b. City of East Palo Alto. 2030 Climate Action Plan and Adaptation Strategies. September 2023, https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/public_works/page/23694/epa_2 030_community_climate_action_plan_adaptation_strategies.pdf.
SPUR, 2024. SPUR. Look Out Below: Groundwater Rise Impacts on East Palo Alto—A Case Study for Equitable Adaptation. 12 June 2024, https://www.spur.org/sites/default/files/2024- 06/SPUR_Look_Out_Below.pdf.
AACE International, 2020. Cost Estimate Classification System – As Applied in Engineering, Procurement, and Construction for the Process Industries. AACE International Recommended Practice No. 18R97. 298
Attachment A
Preliminary Site Screening Map
299
7 160 ft
12 100 ft
27 120
ft
18 70 ft
23 75 ft
24 125 ft
25 80 ft
26 90 ft
21 80 ft
22 160 ft
4 100 ft
3 100 ft
6 90 ft
8 100
ft
8 100
ft
8 100 ft
9 100 ft
10 70 ft
20 100 ft
11 80 ft
11 80 ft
11 80 ft
13 14 140 ft
90 ft
14 100 ft
2 75 ft
16 100 ft
27 120 ft
17 100 ft
28 140 ft
14 200 ft
5 90 ft
13 140
ft
30 140 ft
29 140
ft
19 90 ft
29 140 ft
30 140 ft
24 125 ft
9 100 ft
28 140 ft
Legend
XX Tank Site ID
YY ft Maximum Tank Diameter
the Site Can Accommodate
Elevated Tank (See Note 4)
At-Grade Tank
Below Ground Tank (See Note 3)
Potential Tank Type
Notes
1. All locations are approximate.
2. Potential tank diameter estimated using Google aerial map.
3. Below ground tanks are assumed for all park or school locations outside of areas with high groundwater, in order to preserve the existing use.
4. Sites that require and elevated tank mean that either the tank or site need to be raised to mitigate high/emergent groundwater.
5. Locations 1 (residential backyards located on large lots) and 15 (2401 University Avenue) are not shown on the map. For Location 1, eight of the largest residential backyards were included in the evaluation list, so a blanket evaluation of backyards as a group was omitted from the screening. Location 15 was removed from consideration because it is a small parcel with an existing use across the street from the more favorable City-owned Location 2.
Tank Annotation
±
Sources
1. Street map provided by ArcGIS online.
0 230 460 920
US Feet
Preliminary Site Screening Map
East Palo Alto, CA
October 2025
EKI C40163.00
City of East Palo Alto
Service Area
300
Attachment B
Preliminary Site Screening Matrix
301
Tank Site ID Parcel Category or Address Total Score
22 1893 Woodland Avenue (Old RV Park)
Space for one 160-ft diameter
tank, or multiple smaller
tanks.
3 Provides great benefit to
address low PHD and fire
flow in multiple adjacent
hydrants.
3 No technical feasibility issues. 3 Investment LLC, for sale sign present at the site. 1 Unlikely to have any significant permitting issues. At-Grade/Elevated tank. 3 13 7 2474 Pulgas Avenue (Former Library Site) One 160-ft diameter tank, or multiple smaller tanks 3
Improves PHD and fire flow
in nearby hydrants, but
close to existing turnouts.
2 Bay proximate, likely geotechnical issues and
high groundwater but otherwise feasible. 2 City-owned 3 Shown as an open cleanup site on
geotracker. Moderate soil contamination
based on preliminary review. Parcel is
zoned as industrial/buffer.
2 12
16 Bell Street Park
Potential for one 100-ft
diameter tank. Assumed to be
partially buried to maintain a
lower height within the park.
2 Provides some benefit to
low PHD and a few nearby
hydrants which have just
above 1,500 gpm. But it is
along large transmission
mains.
3 Would require a partially buried or underground
tank with landscaping built around the tank to
retain the park aesthetic.
2 City-owned 3
Potential for permitting or public approval
issues with the park. City discussed that a
new development on an adjacent parcel
may be looking into an easement through
this parcel.
2 12
31 1798 Bay Road (Tanklage Site)
Space for multiple large tanks
(e.g., two 100-ft diameter
tanks).
3 Good PHD, a few deficient
hydrants are nearby, but
close to existing turnouts.
2 Bay proximate, likely geotechnical issues and
high groundwater but otherwise feasible.
Partially buried or underground tank not feasible
due to elevated groundwater.
2 City-owned 2 Unlikely to have any significant permitting issues. At-Grade/Elevated tank. 3 12
24 1266 Beech Street (Potential Future MLK
Park)
Space for multiple large tanks
(e.g., two 125-ft diameter
tanks).
3 OK PHD and fire flow in the
area.
2 Bay proximate, likely geotechnical issues and
high groundwater but otherwise feasible. 2 City-owned 3 Located in the SPUR groundwater rise
map. Slightly elevated tank likely required.
Potential for public pushback to building
this on a parcel directly connected to the
bay front.
1 11
30 Parcel at end of Purdue Ave (Future
Soccer Field Parcel)
Large open space available,
but slated for new
park/soccer field
3 Good PHD, a few deficient
hydrants are nearby, but
close to existing turnouts.
2 Bay proximate, likely geotechnical issues and
high groundwater but otherwise feasible.
Partially buried or underground tank not feasible
due to elevated groundwater.
2 Owned by Ravenswood Business
District but the specific plan
policy calls for new tank at this
approximate location.
2 Elevated/At-Grade, shown as a cleanup
site on geotracker. Redevelopment as a
new park will impact use.
2 11
29 2519/2565 Pulgas Ave
Large open space available,
but slated for new City Hall
and/or other City facilities.
Based on initial plans, there is
insufficient space.
2 Good PHD, a few deficient
hydrants are nearby, but
close to existing turnouts.
2 Bay proximate, likely geotechnical issues and
high groundwater but otherwise feasible. 2
City-owned. But but slated for
new City Hall and/or other City
facilities.
2 Elevated/At-Grade, shown as a cleanup
site on geotracker. Redevelopment as a
new City Hall impact use. Compatible with
Ravenswood/Four Corners Specific Plan
2 10
2 1601 Bay Road Space for one 75-ft diameter
tank max. 1
Improves PHD and fire flow
in nearby hydrants, but
close to existing turnouts.
2 No technical feasibility issues. 3
City-owned. However, placing
the tank at the intersection is
likely not preferred and
coordination with the adjacent
site owner would be beneficial to
site the tank back from the
street.
3 Not compatible with the
Ravenswood/Four Corners Specific plan. 1 10
23 Vacant lot behind 104 Verbena Drive One 75-ft Dia. tank 1 Low PHD and multiple
deficient hydrants on this
dead end.
3 No technical feasibility issues. 3 Private Individual 1 Unlikely to have any significant permitting
issues, but within a residential area, so
stakeholder pushback is likely. At-Grade
tank.
2 10
3 1638 Bay Road One 100-ft Dia. Tank 2 OK PHD/FF 2 No technical feasibility issues. 3 Private, Multiple parcels to
purchase, multiple owners to
deal with.
1 Unlikely to have any significant permitting
issues, but adjacent to a residential area,
so stakeholder pushback is likely. At-Grade
tank.
2 10
4 851 Weeks Street One 100-ft Dia. Tank 2 OK PHD/FF 2 No technical feasibility issues. 3 Private Individual 1 Unlikely to have any significant permitting
issues, but within a residential area, so
stakeholder pushback is likely. At-Grade
tank.
2 10
Table 1
Preliminary Site Screening Matrix
Parcel Size Hydraulic Improvements Technical Feasibility Parcel Owner Permitting, Tank Type, and Site Constraint Water Storage Tank Siting Study
City of East Palo Alto, CA
302
Tank Site ID Parcel Category or Address Total Score
Table 1
Preliminary Site Screening Matrix
Parcel Size Hydraulic Improvements Technical Feasibility Parcel Owner Permitting, Tank Type, and Site Constraint Water Storage Tank Siting Study
City of East Palo Alto, CA
5 794 Weeks St One 90-ft Dia. Tank 2 OK PHD/FF 2 No technical feasibility issues. 3 Private Individual 1 Unlikely to have any significant permitting
issues, but within a residential area, so
stakeholder pushback is likely. At-Grade
tank.
2 10
20 832 Bell Street One 100-ft Dia. Tank 2 Lower PHD, but OK FF 2 No technical feasibility issues. 3 Private Individual 1 Unlikely to have any significant permitting
issues, but within a residential area, so
stakeholder pushback is likely. At-Grade
tank.
2 10
25 1168 Beech Street One 80-ft Dia. Tank 2 Good PHD, a few deficient hydrants are nearby. 2 No technical feasibility issues. 3 Private Individual 1 Unlikely to have any significant permitting
issues, but within a residential area, so
stakeholder pushback is likely. At-Grade
tank.
2 10
8 1200 Runnymede St Large site, three 100-ft tanks 3 OK PHD, one deficient hydrant adjacent to site 2 Bay proximate, likely geotechnical issues and high groundwater but otherwise feasible. 2 LLC 1
Located in the SPUR groundwater rise
map. Elevated tank likely required. Parcel
is zoned as industrial/buffer.
2 10
11 East Palo Alto Charter School Multiple locations where a 80- ft Dia. Tank could be sited. 3 OK PHD, two deficient hydrants adjacent to site 2 Would require a partially buried or underground
tank with landscaping built around the tank to
retain the use as a field.
2 School 2
Open spaces are being used by school.
Significant impacts to stakeholders are
anticipated.
1 10
21 Bridge Pop Park One 80-ft Dia. Tank 2
Provides great benefit to
address low PHD and fire
flow in multiple adjacent
hydrants.
3 No technical feasibility issues. 3 LLC 1
Potential for permitting or public approval
issues with the existing park. Also adjacent
to a residential neighborhood.
1 10
26 1029 Beech Street One 90-ft Dia. tank 2 Good PHD, a few deficient hydrants are nearby. 2 Potential for geotechnical issues with high groundwater but otherwise feasible. 2 Private Individual 1 Unlikely to have any significant permitting
issues, but within a residential area, so
stakeholder pushback is likely. At-Grade
tank.
2 9
18 1954 Clarke Avenue One 70-ft Dia. Tank 1 Lower PHD, but OK FF 2 No technical feasibility issues. 3 Investment INC 1 Unlikely to have any significant permitting
issues, but within a residential area, so
stakeholder pushback is likely. At-Grade
tank.
2 9
303
Tank Site ID Parcel Category or Address Total Score
Table 1
Preliminary Site Screening Matrix
Parcel Size Hydraulic Improvements Technical Feasibility Parcel Owner Permitting, Tank Type, and Site Constraint Water Storage Tank Siting Study
City of East Palo Alto, CA
9 1201 Runnymede St Large site, two 100-ft tanks 3 OK PHD, one deficient hydrant adjacent to site 2 Bay proximate, likely geotechnical issues and high groundwater but otherwise feasible. 2 LLC 1
Located in the SPUR groundwater rise
map. Slightly elevated tank likely required.
Potential for public pushback to building
this on a parcel directly connected to the
bay front.
1 9
28 Costano Elementary School Large open space available. 3 Good PHD/FF in this area 1 Would require a partially buried or underground
tank with landscaping built around the tank to
retain the use as a field.
2 School 2
Open spaces are being used by school.
Significant impacts to stakeholders are
anticipated.
1 9
27 Los Robles Ronald McNair Academy Large open space available. 3 Good PHD/FF in this area 1 Would require a partially buried or underground
tank with landscaping built around the tank to
retain the use as a field.
2 School 2
Open spaces are being used by school.
Significant impacts to stakeholders are
anticipated.
1 9
14 Cesar Chavez Ravenswood Middle School Multiple large tanks could be sited 3
Good PHD and FF. This is
close to turnout so the
hydraulic benefit is low.
1 Would require a partially buried or underground
tank with landscaping built around the tank to
retain the use as a field.
2 School 2
Open spaces are being used by school.
Significant impacts to stakeholders are
anticipated.
1 9
10 992 Runnymede St
One 70-ft Dia. Tank, but
smaller and less desirable
than other sites
1 OK PHD, one deficient
hydrant adjacent to site 2 No technical feasibility issues. 3 Private Individual 1 Unlikely to have any significant permitting
issues, but within a residential area, so
stakeholder pushback is likely. At-Grade
tank.
2 9
17 Joel Davis Park Potential for one 100-ft
diameter tank. 2 OK PHD/FF 2
Would require a partially buried or underground
tank with landscaping built around the tank to
retain the park aesthetic. However, groundwater
is elevated, so this is not feasible.
1 City-owned, but not preferred by
the City as discussed at a
coordination meeting.
3 Potential for permitting or public approval
issues with the park. Also within a
residential neighborhood.
1 9
12 Jack Farrell Park (Baseball Field) 2508
Fordham Street
Potential for one 100-ft
diameter tank. 2 Good PHD/FF. Close to
turnouts.
1 Would require a partially buried or underground
tank with landscaping built around the tank to
retain the park aesthetic. However, groundwater
is elevated, so this is not feasible.
1 City-owned 3
Potential for permitting or public approval
issues with the park. Also within a
residential neighborhood.
1 8
6 800 Weeks St One 90-ft Dia. Tank 2 OK PHD/FF 2 Site access is an issue, the parcel connects to street with a very thin 11-ft strip. 1 LLC 1
Access easement would be required. Also
within a residential area, so stakeholder
pushback is likely. At-Grade tank.
1 7
1 Back Yard Spaces
Most favorable backyard
locations are included in
evaluation above
0 0 0 0 0 N/A
15 2401 University Avenue
Existing use prevents
placement of a tank at this
location
0 0 0 0 0 N/A
304
Attachment C
Preliminary Tank Siting Conceptual Layouts
305
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X PUMP STATION BUILDING 2500-GPM BACKUP GEN W W W W W W W W W W 4''W 4''W 4''W 4''W 4''W 4''W 8''W
8''W
20.00' W W 4''(A)W
4''(A)W 4''(A)W 4''(A)W 10''W 10''W 10''W 10''W 6''W
6''W
6''(A)W
6''(A)W
6''(A)W
10''W
10''W
10''W
10''W
6''W
6''W
6''W
10''W
10''W 4''W PROPOSED TANK #1A DIAMETER = 120' HEIGHT = 35' TANK VOL. = 2.0 MG PUMP STATION BUILDING INCL. ELECTRICAL APPROX. 450 SF BACKUP GENERATOR APPROX. 100 SF 1893 WOODLAND AVE APN = 063501010 ZONING = R-MD-1 APPROX. 50,000 SF 20' SETBACK FROM PROPERTY LINE (TYP.) PAVED ACCESS ROAD TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION TRAILER 60' X 15' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION LAYDOWN 40' X 15' 10' TREE SCREENING STRIP (TYP.) 10' TREE SCREENING STRIP (TYP.) (N) 10" PIPE PER WATER SYSTEM MASTER PLAN PROJECT P-30 (N) 10" PIPE PER WATER SYSTEM MASTER PLAN PROJECT P-30 ABANDON (E) 4" PER WATER SYSTEM MASTER PLAN PROJECT P-30 PROPOSED TANK #1B DIAMETER = 80' TANK VOL. = 1.0 MG TANK HEIGHT = 35' ABANDON (E) 4" PER WATER SYSTEM MASTER PLAN PROJECT P-30 CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO EAST PALO ALTO, CA JULY 2026 EKI C40163.00 G:\EKI_CONSTRUCTION_DWGS\C40163_EPATank\C40163_TankSiting.dwg, File date: 6/25/2026 9:11 AM, Print date: 7/7/2026 4:15 PM, by: Chris Pittner 0SCALE: 201" = 40' 40 80 120 PLAN LEGEND: SETBACK PROPERTY LINE 10" W EXISTING WATER LINE PAVED AREAS TANK SITE #1 CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT 1893 WOODLAND AVE FIGURE A 10''W PROPOSED WATER LINE NOTES: 1. DIAMETERS SHOWN ARE EXTERIOR TANK DIAMETERS. 306
PUMP STATION BUILDING 2500-GPM
BACKUP GEN W W W W W W W W W W W 20.00' W W W 8''W 8''W 8''W 8''W PUMP STATION BUILDING INCL. ELECTRICAL APPROX. 450 SF BACKUP GENERATOR APPROX. 100 SF 20' SETBACK FROM PROPERTY LINE 2474 PULGAS AVE APNS = 063240350,063240220, 063240440, & 063240210 ZONING = REC APPROX. 47,000 SF 10' TREE SCREENING STRIP (TYP.) TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION TRAILER 60' X 15' PAVED ACCESS ROAD TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION LAYDOWN 40' X 15' PROPOSED TANK #2 DIAMETER = 142' HEIGHT = 35' TANK VOL. = 3.0 MG CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO EAST PALO ALTO, CA JULY 2026 EKI C40163.00 G:\EKI_CONSTRUCTION_DWGS\C40163_EPATank\C40163_TankSiting.dwg, File date: 6/25/2026 9:11 AM, Print date: 7/7/2026 4:15 PM, by: Chris Pittner 0SCALE: 201" = 40' 40 80 120 PLAN LEGEND: SETBACK PROPERTY LINE 10" W EXISTING WATER LINE PAVED AREAS TANK SITE #2 CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT 2474 PULGAS AVE FIGURE B PROPOSED WATER LINE 10''W NOTES: 1. DIAMETERS SHOWN ARE EXTERIOR TANK DIAMETERS. 307
2180 EUCLID AVE APN = 063292320 ZONING = PR APPROX. 205,500 SF CITY EASEMENT (NOT SPECIFIED ON ZONING MAP) APPROX. EXTENT OF (E) SKATE PARK APPROX. EDGE OF (E) STRUCTURE PROPOSED TANK #3 DIAMETER = 40' HEIGHT = 25', PARTIALLY BURIED WITH 15' BGS TANK VOL. = 0.66 MG PUMP STATION AREA 2500-GPM BACKUP GEN W W W BELOW GRADE PUMP STATION INCL. ELECTRICAL APPROX. 450 SF BACKUP GENERATOR APPROX. 100 SF W W W W (N) 8" W LINE TO RUN IN CITY EASEMENT SITE ACCESS CONNECTING TO EXISTING ROAD BEHIND YMCA FRONT SIDE OF TANK SLOPED ~10-15% DOWN TO EXISTING GRADE BACK SIDE OF TANK FENCED OFF AND EXPOSED FOR ACCESS TO PIPING, MANWAY, AND TOP HATCHTEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION TRAILER 60' X 15' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION LAYDOWN 40' X 15' X X X X X X TEMPORARY TANK CONSTRUCTION AREA CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO EAST PALO ALTO, CA JULY 2026 EKI C40163.00 G:\EKI_CONSTRUCTION_DWGS\C40163_EPATank\C40163_TankSiting.dwg, File date: 6/25/2026 9:11 AM, Print date: 7/7/2026 4:15 PM, by: Chris Pittner 0SCALE: 201" = 40' 40 80 120 PLAN LEGEND: SETBACK PROPERTY LINE 10" W EXISTING WATER LINE PAVED AREAS TANK SITE #3 CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT BELL STREET PARK FIGURE C PROPOSED WATER LINE 10''W NOTES: 1. DIAMETERS SHOWN ARE EXTERIOR TANK DIAMETERS. 308
8''W 8''W 8''W 8''W 8''W 1266 BEECH STREET APN = 063600060 ZONING = PR APPROX. 80,500 SF PUMP STATION BUILDING 2500-GPMBACKUP GEN TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION TRAILER 60' X 15' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION LAYDOWN 40' X 15' X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 10' TREE SCREENING STRIP (TYP.) PUMP STATION BUILDING INCL. ELECTRICAL APPROX. 450 SF BACKUP GENERATOR APPROX. 100 SF WW W W W W W W W W W PROPOSED TANK #4B DIAMETER = 100' HEIGHT = 37' TANK VOL. = 1.5 MG PROPOSED TANK #4A DIAMETER = 100' HEIGHT = 37' TANK VOL. = 1.5 MG 20' 12''W 12''W 12''W 12''W 12''W CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO EAST PALO ALTO, CA JULY 2026 EKI C40163.00 G:\EKI_CONSTRUCTION_DWGS\C40163_EPATank\C40163_TankSiting.dwg, File date: 6/25/2026 9:11 AM, Print date: 7/7/2026 4:16 PM, by: Chris Pittner 0SCALE: 201" = 40' 40 80 120 PLAN LEGEND: SETBACK PROPERTY LINE 10" W EXISTING WATER LINE PAVED AREAS TANK SITE #4 CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT 1266 BEECH STREET (FUTURE MLK PARK) FIGURE D PROPOSED WATER LINE 10''W NOTES: 1. DIAMETERS SHOWN ARE EXTERIOR TANK DIAMETERS. 309
X X X X PUMP STATION BUILDING 2500-GPM BACKUP GEN W W TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION TRAILER 60' X 15' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION LAYDOWN 40' X 15' PROPOSED TANK #5A DIAMETER = 100' HEIGHT = 37' TANK VOL. = 1.5 MG PUMP STATION BUILDING INCL. ELECTRICAL APPROX. 450 SF BACKUP GENERATOR APPROX. 100 SF PAVED ACCESS ROAD X X W W PROPOSED TANK #5B DIAMETER = 100' HEIGHT = 37' TANK VOL. = 1.5 MGW W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO EAST PALO ALTO, CA JULY 2026 EKI C40163.00 G:\EKI_CONSTRUCTION_DWGS\C40163_EPATank\C40163_TankSiting.dwg, File date: 6/25/2026 9:11 AM, Print date: 7/7/2026 4:16 PM, by: Chris Pittner 0SCALE: 201" = 40' 40 80 120 PLAN LEGEND: SETBACK PROPERTY LINE 10" W EXISTING WATER LINE PAVED AREAS TANK SITE #5 CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT END OF PURDUE AVE FUTURE ATHLETIC FIELD FIGURE E PROPOSED WATER LINE 10''W NOTES: 1. DIAMETERS SHOWN ARE EXTERIOR TANK DIAMETERS. 310
Attachment D
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment 311
575 Market Street
Suite 3700
San Francisco, CA 94105
415.896.5900 phone
415.896.0332 fax
esassoc.com
memorandum
date June 19, 2026
to Tyler F. Colyer, P.E., EKI Environment & Water, Inc. cc Chris Pittner, P.E., QISP, EKI Environment & Water, Inc.
Yuqing Gao, EKI Environment & Water, Inc.
from Meryka Dirks, Project Director
Vince Molina, Project Manager
subject East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum Purpose and Scope
Environmental Science Associates (ESA) is pleased to present this environmental screening memorandum to EKI Environment & Water, Inc. (EKI) for the evaluation of five potential water tank sites in the city of East Palo Alto (City) that could collectively store approximately 3 million gallons (MG) of potable water (Project). Specifically, this memorandum responds to EKI’s request for identifying potential environmental issues and the recommended approach to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The evaluation presented herein considers the results of state and federal environmental database searches and aerial photographs, based on information provided by EKI from March 2026 through April 2026, as discussed further below.
Background
On October 4, 2022, the City adopted its Water System Master Plan (WSMP), the overall goal of which is “to assess the current operations and functionality of the City’s existing water system, identify deficiencies, and prioritize recommendations for future water system improvements to address both current operational issues and plan for future residential, commercial and industrial growth within the City’s water service territory”.
1 The WSMP describes the lack of storage tanks within the City’s system and that the City has a current 2.86 MG deficit and a projected future deficit of 2.85 MG (assuming planned tank and groundwater well projects are constructed).2 Thus, the goal of the Project is to assess five potential sites that could collectively store approximately 3.0 MG located throughout the City so that the City can meet its current and future storage needs, as identified in the WSMP. 1 City of East Palo Alto. 2026. Water System Master Plan 2022. Accessed March 28, 2026. https://www.ci.east-paloalto.ca.us/publicworks/project/water-system-master-plan-2022. 2 City of East Palo Alto. 2023. Water System Master Plan. March 2023. 312
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 2 Project Description
The potential storage tank sites are distributed throughout the City (see Figure 1). Based on further evaluation and decision‑making, the City would ultimately select one or more sites that would individually or collectively provide approximately 3.0 MG of storage. At this time, proposed tank designs, number of tanks, and appurtenances (e.g., pipelines, generators) vary. For example, one site could include a larger tank with an approximate storage capacity of 2.1 MG and a smaller tank with an approximate storage capacity of 1.0 MG, whereas another site could include a single larger tank with an approximate storage capacity of 3.0 MG. It is expected that each site would also feature a pump station building, an emergency back-up generator, security fencing and gates, and landscape screening.
Table 1 presents the locations of the potential sites. The components and configurations proposed for each site, including conceptual design illustrations, are described in the sections below.
TABLE 1
PROPOSED SITES
Name Coordinates (approximate) Assessor’s Parcel Number(s) 1893 Woodland Avenue 37.453725, -122.130600 063-501-010 2474 Pulgas Avenue 37.472078, -122.131286 063-240-350; 063-240-220; 063-240-440; 063-240-210
Bell Street Park 37.464578, -122.142639 063-292-320
1266 Beech Street 37.464678, -122.126953 063-600-060
Pulgas Avenue 37.476821, -122.132471 063-121-530
Source: Data compiled by ESA in 2026.
313
Donohoe St
Edgewood Dr
University Ave
Connolly
Way
Salas
Ct
Runnymede St
Sage St
Cooley
Ave
Tara Rd
Jasmine
Way
Green St
Pulgas
Ave
Oconnor St
Demeter St
Euclid
Ave
Capitol
Ave
Garden St
Beech
St
Weeks St
Bayshore Rd
Illinois St
Woodland Ave
Bay Rd Clarke
Ave
University
Ave
Menlo Park
East Palo Alto
Palo Alto
101
Pulgas Avenue
Bell
Street
Park
1893
Woodland
Avenue
2474 Pulgas
Avenue
1266 Beech
Street
Path: U:\GIS\GIS\Projects\15xxxx\D201500591.11_EPA_
Water_Tank_Siting\03_Project\Project_Locations.aprx Fig2_Project_Vicinity_v1, WMcCullough 4/14/2026 SOURCE: ESA, 2026 East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Figure 1
Project Sites Locations
N
0 2,000
Feet
Project Location
Regional Inset
Project Sites
City Boundary
314
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 4 1893 Woodland Avenue
Existing Site Conditions
The site at 1893 Woodland Avenue (Woodland site) is located near the southern portion of the City and is approximately 1.15 acres (50,000 square feet). The Woodland site was formerly used for a recreational vehicle (RV) park (Glory Mobile Home Park). It is currently a vacant parcel, generally bounded by West Bayshore Road to the north/northeast and Woodland Avenue to the south/southwest. Commercial uses (an autobody shop) are located immediately west/northwest of the Woodland site. U.S. Highway 101 is located approximately 50 feet northeast of the Woodland site across West Bayshore Road. San Francisquito Creek runs along the south side of Woodland Avenue, approximately 50 feet southwest of the Woodland site.
There are also residences approximately 100 feet south and southeast of the Woodland site. The Woodland site’s zoning and land use designations are R-MD-13 and Medium Density Residential, respectively.
The Woodland site is generally flat and is characterized by areas of pavement and patches of vegetation.
Several clusters of trees are present throughout the interior and along the northern, southeastern, and southwestern portions of the Woodland site perimeter.
Proposed Components
Potential tank designs at the Woodland site include steel or concrete tanks with varying storage capacities, as presented in Table 2. If the City proceeds with the Woodland site, this site would include one larger tank and one smaller tank of same composition (concrete or steel) with approximately 2 MG and 1 MG of storage capacity, respectively. The conceptual design plan for the tanks and appurtenances at the Woodland site are shown in Figure 2 and described below.
TABLE 2
1893 WOODLAND AVENUE SITE – PROPOSED TANK DIMENSIONS AND CAPACITIES Composition Diameter (feet) Height (feet) Capacity (MG) Concrete
112
35 2.0
80 1.0
OR
Steel
120
35 2.1
80 0.94
Note: The Woodland site would include either one larger concrete tank and one smaller concrete tank or one larger steel tank and one smaller steel tank.
The tank exteriors would include a neutral‑colored coating and/or architectural treatment to match the surrounding existing uses. Outdoor security lighting with motion sensors and light shielding would be installed. A 10‑foot‑wide landscaped buffer consisting of trees and shrubs is proposed along the Woodland site perimeter to provide visual screening.
3 R-MD-1 is a sub zone under the R-MD (Multiple-Family Medium Density Residential Zone) zoning. For primary uses, RMD-1 generally allows apartments and other multi-family residential buildings (e.g., townhomes). 315
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
PUMP STATION
BUILDING
2500-GPM
BACKUP
GEN
W W
W W W
W W W W W
4''W 4''W
8''W
20.00'
W
W
4''(A)W
4''(A)W
4''(A)W
4''(A)W
10''W
10''W
10''W
10''W
6''W
6''(A)W
6''(A)W
10''W
10''W
10''W
6''W
6''W 10''W
PROPOSED TANK #1A
DIAMETER = 120'
HEIGHT = 35'
STEEL TANK VOL. = 2.1 MG
PUMP STATION BUILDING
INCL. ELECTRICAL
APPROX. 450 SF
BACKUP GENERATOR
APPROX. 100 SF
1893 WOODLAND AVE
APN = 063501010
ZONING = R-MD-1
APPROX. 7210 SF
20' SETBACK FROM
PROPERTY LINE
PAVED ACCESS ROAD
TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION TRAILER
60' X 15'
TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION LAYDOWN
40' X 15'
10' TREE SCREENING STRIP
10' TREE SCREENING STRIP
(N) 10" PIPE
(N) 10" PIPE
ABANDON (E) 4" PIPE
PROPOSED TANK #1A
DIAMETER = 112'
HEIGHT = 35'
CONCRETE TANK VOL. = 2.0 MG
PROPOSED TANK #1B
DIAMETER = 80'
HEIGHT = 35'
STEEL TANK VOL. = 0.94
CONCRETE TANK VOL. = 1.0 MG
ABANDON (E) 4" PIPE
CITY OF EAST PALO ALT
EAST PALO ALTO, C
MARCH 20
EKI C40163
_
_
_
_
g_
g,
,
,
y
0 SCALE:
20 1" = 40'
40 80 120
PLAN
LEGEND:
SETBACK
PROPERTY LINE
10" W EXISTING WATER LINE
PAVED AREAS
TANK SITE #22 CONCEPTUAL LAYO
1893 WOODLAND A
FIGUR
10''W PROPOSED WATER LINE
NOTES:
1. DIAMETERS SHOWN ARE EXTERIOR TANK
DIAMETERS.
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study
Figure 2
Proposed Components - 1893 Woodland Avenue Site
SOURCE: EKI, 2026
D201500591.11 - EPA Water Tank Siting Study\07 Graphics\Illustrator LEGEND:
SETBACK
PROPERTY LINE
10" W EXISTING WATER LINE
PAVED AREAS
10''W PROPOSED WATER LINE
1. DIAMETERS SHOWN
ARE EXTERIOR TANK
DIAMETERS.
NOTES:
0 SCALE:
20 1" = 40'
40 80 120
(E) EXISTING
(N) NEW
316
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 6 The tanks would be sited with a minimum 20‑foot setback from the Woodland site’s property lines. A paved access road and perimeter improvement would be constructed around the tanks. Access would be located along Woodland Avenue near the southwestern corner of the Woodland site. Up to approximately 28,000 square feet of new impervious surfaces would be developed at the Woodland site associated with the improvements.
The Woodland site would also include a pump station building (occupying approximately 450 square feet) and an emergency back-up generator (occupying approximately 100 square feet), both located near the southwestern corner of the site. The generator size is anticipated to be approximately 125 to 150 kilowatts (kW). Pump station capacity is expected to range from approximately 1,500 to 2,500 gallons per minute (gpm). The Woodland site would also include pipeline connections to a water pipeline adjacent to the site.
For security, the Woodland site would be enclosed by a 6‑ to 8‑foot‑tall dark colored metal security fence.
A metal gate would be installed at the site entrance along Woodland Avenue.
Construction
Staging would be located on-site with a temporary area for construction laydown near the eastern corner of the Woodland site spanning approximately 600 square feet. A temporary construction trailer would be placed along the southern boundary of Woodland site, near the entrance, and would take up approximately 900 square feet of space.
Construction at the Woodland site would begin with site preparation activities, which would include removal of existing vegetation. Up to 15 trees would be removed to accommodate the components at the Woodland site.
Following site preparation, grading and soil compaction would occur across the Woodland site to establish foundations for the storage tanks, access areas, and utility corridors. The Woodland site components are expected to be installed at or near existing grade. Excavation beneath tank pad areas would be up to 10 feet in depth. Installation of connecting pipelines within the adjacent roadways would require trenching, with excavation depths up to 10 feet.
Construction is expected to occur during typical daytime hours in compliance with local noise regulations. Nighttime construction is not anticipated. Temporary traffic disruptions could occur during construction, particularly during installation of pipelines within public right-of-way (ROW). These disruptions could include temporary lane closures; however, full roadway closures would not occur. 317
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 7 2474 Pulgas Avenue
Existing Site Conditions
The site at 2474 Pulgas Avenue (2474 Pulgas site) is located near the eastern boundary of the City, approximately 250 feet southeast of the intersection of Bay Road and Pulgas Avenue and is approximately 1.08 acres (47,000 square feet). The 2474 Pulgas site is currently a vacant parcel, generally bounded by the public/recreational uses (EPACENTER Youth Arts and Music Center) to the north, industrial uses to the east and south, and Pulgas Avenue to the west. There are residential uses approximately 60 feet west/southwest of the 2474 Pulgas site across Pulgas Avenue. The 2474 Pulgas site is located within the Ravenswood Business District/Four Corners Specific Plan Area. The 2474 Pulgas site’s zoning and land use designations are PI4 and Public/Institutional, respectively.
The 2474 Pulgas site is generally flat and is characterized by areas of gravel, bare soil, and patches of vegetation. A cleared area is visible in the northern portion of the parcel, while the southern portion contains denser vegetation. The 2474 Pulgas site is surrounded by fencing.
Proposed Components
Potential tank designs at the 2474 Pulgas site include a single steel tank or single concrete tank with approximately 3.0 MG of storage capacity, as presented in Table 3. The conceptual design plan for the tanks and appurtenances at the 2474 Pulgas site is shown in Figure 3 and described below.
TABLE 3
2474 PULGAS AVENUE SITE – PROPOSED TANK DIMENSIONS AND CAPACITIES Composition Diameter (feet) Height (feet) Capacity (MG) Concrete 136 35 3.0
OR
Steel 142 35 3.0
Note: The 2474 Pulgas site would include either one steel tank or one concrete tank.
The tank exteriors would include a neutral‑colored coating and/or architectural treatment intended to match the surrounding existing uses. Outdoor security lighting with motion sensors and light shielding would be installed. A 10‑foot‑wide landscaped buffer consisting of trees and shrubs is proposed along the site perimeter to provide visual screening.
The tanks would be sited with a minimum 20‑foot setback from the 2474 Pulgas site’s property lines. A paved access road and perimeter improvement would be constructed around the tanks. Access would be located along Pulgas Avenue near the southwestern corner of the 2474 Pulgas site. Up to approximately 26,000 square feet of new impervious surfaces would be developed at the 2474 Pulgas site associated with the improvements.
4 PI, or Public Institutional Zone, provides for public uses including City building, City corporation yards, public schools, fire stations, police stations, and other public uses. This zone also allows for a variety of support uses. Intensity of uses is not regulated.
318
PUMP STATION
BUILDING
2500-GPM
BACKUP
GEN
W W W W W
W W W W W W
20.00'
W W W
8''W
8''W
8''W
8''W
PROPOSED TANK #2
DIAMETER = 136'
HEIGHT = 35'
CONCRETE TANK VOL. = 3.0 MG
PUMP STATION BUILDING
INCL. ELECTRICAL
APPROX. 450 SF
BACKUP GENERATOR
APPROX. 100 SF
20' SETBACK FROM
PROPERTY LINE
2474 PULGAS AVE
APNS = 063240350,063240220,
063240440, & 063240210
ZONING = REC
APPROX. 47,000 SF
10' TREE SCREENING STRIP
TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION TRAILER
60' X 15'
PAVED ACCESS ROAD
TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION LAYDOWN
40' X 15'
PROPOSED TANK #2
DIAMETER = 142'
HEIGHT = 35'
STEEL TANK VOL. = 3.0 MG
CITY OF EAST PALO ALT
EAST PALO ALTO, C
MARCH 20
EKI C40163
_
_
_
_
g_
g,
,
,
y
0 SCALE:
20 1" = 40'
40 80 120
PLAN
LEGEND:
SETBACK
PROPERTY LINE
10" W EXISTING WATER LINE
PAVED AREAS
TANK SITE #2 CONCEPTUAL LAYO
2474 PULGAS A
FIGUR
PROPOSED WATER LINE 10''W
NOTES:
1. DIAMETERS SHOWN ARE EXTERIOR TANK
DIAMETERS.
1. DIAMETERS SHOWN
ARE EXTERIOR TANK
DIAMETERS.
NOTES:
LEGEND:
SETBACK
PROPERTY LINE
8" W EXISTING WATER LINE
PAVED AREAS
10''W PROPOSED WATER LINE
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study
Figure 3
Proposed Components - 2474 Pulgas Avenue Site
SOURCE: EKI, 2026; ESA, 2026
D201500591.11 - EPA Water Tank Siting Study\07 Graphics\Illustrator 0 SCALE:
20 1" = 40'
40 80 120
8” W PIPE
319
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 9 The 2474 Pulgas site would also include a pump station building (occupying approximately 450 square feet) and an emergency backup generator (occupying approximately 100 square feet), both located along the southern boundary of the site. The generator is anticipated to be approximately 125 to 150 kW. Pump station capacity is expected to range from approximately 1,500 to 2,500 gpm. The 2474 Pulgas site would also include pipeline connections to a water pipeline that runs along Pulgas Avenue.
For security, the 2474 Pulgas site would be enclosed by a 6‑ to 8‑foot‑tall dark colored metal security fence. A metal gate would be installed at the site entrance along Pulgas Avenue.
Construction
Staging would be located on-site with a temporary area for construction laydown near the southeastern corner of the 2474 Pulgas site spanning approximately 600 square feet. A temporary construction trailer would be placed just south of the laydown area and would take up approximately 900 square feet of space.
Construction at the 2474 Pulgas site would begin with site preparation activities, which would include removal of existing vegetation. The 2474 Pulgas site contains clusters of palm trees along its western boundary that could require removal to accommodate Project components.
Following site preparation, construction activities would be the same as those described above for the Woodland site.
320
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 10 Bell Street Park
Existing Site Conditions
The site at Bell Street Park (Bell Street Park site) is located within a parcel that also includes the Lewis and Joan Platt East Palo Alto YMCA, East Palo Alto Senior Center, a single family residence, and an approximately 1.1-acre grassy public park. A skate park and playground is located in the northeastern and southeastern corners, respectively, of Bell Street Park. The whole parcel totals approximately 4.72 acres (205,500 square feet). The Bell Street Park site, located on the southern portion of the parcel, is generally bound by Bell Street Park Place5 to the north, State Route 109/University Avenue to the east, mixed commercial and residential uses to the south, and the Ravenswood City School District headquarters building and Euclid Avenue to the west. Other surrounding land uses include residences approximately 400 feet north and east of the Bell Street Park site and approximately 250 feet to the west. A medical laboratory warehouse is located immediately southwest of the Bell Street Park site, while a corporation yard is located approximately 100 feet south of the site. The Bell Street Park site is approximately 1,500 feet northwest of the U.S. Highway 101 and State Route 109/University Avenue junction. The Bell Street Park site’s zoning and land use designations PR6 and Parks/Recreation/Conservation, respectively.
The Bell Street Park site is generally flat and consists of a vegetated areas and trees located along the western boundary.
Proposed Components
The potential tank design at the Bell Street Park site includes one concrete tank with a diameter of approximately 40 feet and a storage capacity of approximately 0.66 MG. The concrete tank would be partially buried approximately 15 feet below ground surface and would have a height of approximately 10 feet above ground (i.e., 25 feet in height overall). The tank would be partially buried with earthen slopes of approximately 10 to 15 percent extending down to the existing grade on the southern side of the tank. The conceptual design plan for the tank and appurtenances at the Bell Street Park site is shown in Figure 4 and described below.
The tank exterior would include a neutral‑colored coating and/or architectural treatment intended to match the surrounding existing uses. Outdoor security lighting with motion sensors and light shielding would be installed. A 10‑foot‑wide landscaped buffer consisting of trees and shrubs is proposed along the site perimeter to provide visual screening.
5 Bell Street Park Place is an existing internal access road that connects the parcel’s northeastern parking lot with the western parking lots and generally bisects the parcel into northern and southern portions. 6 PR, or Parks and Recreation Zone, provides for public parks including trails, community gardens, and other similar uses providing open space and conservation resources. Appropriate land uses include public recreational uses, including public parkland, open space, and associated recreational activities. Recreation facilities with an emphasis on outdoor use are also allowed. Other uses determined to be compatible with the primary uses may also be allowed. The allowable intensity is variable but shall be compatible with surrounding uses. 321
2180 EUCLID AVE
APN = 063292320
ZONING = PR
APPROX. 205,500 SF
CITY EASEMENT
(NOT SPECIFIED ON ZONING MAP)
APPROX. EXTENT OF
(E) SKATE PARK
APPROX. EDGE OF
(E) STRUCTURE
PROPOSED TANK #3
DIAMETER = 40'
HEIGHT = 25', PARTIALLY BURIED WITH 15' BGS
CONCRETE TANK VOL. = 0.66 MG PUMP STATION
AREA
2500-GPM
BACKUP
GEN
W
W
W
BELOW GRADE
PUMP STATION
INCL. ELECTRICAL
APPROX. 450 SF
BACKUP GENERATOR
APPROX. 100 SF
W W W W
(N) 8" PIPE
SITE ACCESS CONNECTING TO
EXISTING ROAD BEHIND YMCA
FRONT SIDE OF TANK
SLOPED ~10-15% DOWN TO
EXISTING GRADE
BACK SIDE OF TANK FENCED
OFF AND EXPOSED FOR
ACCESS TO PIPING, MANWAY,
AND TOP HATCH
TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION TRAILER
60' X 15'
TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION LAYDOWN
40' X 15'
X X
X X
X
X
TEMPORARY TANK
CONSTRUCTION AREA
CITY OF EAST PALO AL
EAST PALO ALTO,
MARCH
EKI C4016
_
_
_
_
g
g,
,
,
y
0 SCALE:
20 1" = 40'
40 80 120
PLAN
LEGEND:
SETBACK
PROPERTY LINE
10" W EXISTING WATER LINE
PAVED AREAS
TANK SITE #3 CONCEPTUAL LAYO
BELL STREET PA
FIGUR
PROPOSED WATER LINE 10''W
NOTES:
1. DIAMETERS SHOWN ARE EXTERIOR TANK
DIAMETERS.
LEGEND:
SETBACK
PROPERTY LINE
PAVED AREAS
10''W PROPOSED WATER LINE
1. DIAMETERS SHOWN
ARE EXTERIOR TANK
DIAMETERS.
NOTES:
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study
Figure 4
Proposed Components - Bell Street Park Site
SOURCE: EKI, 2026
D201500591.11 - EPA Water Tank Siting Study\07 Graphics\Illustrator 0 SCALE:
20 1" = 40'
40 80 120
BGS BELOW GROUND SURFACE
(E) EXISTING
(N) NEW
322
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 12 The tank would be sited at the northwestern corner of Bell Street Park and approximately 40 feet east of the parcel boundary. A pump station building (occupying approximately 450 square feet) would be sited west of the tank. An emergency back-up generator (occupying approximately 100 square feet) would be installed northwest of the tank. The generator size is anticipated to be approximately 125 to 150 kW.
Pump station capacity is expected to range from approximately 1,500 to 2,500 gpm.
A paved area would be developed along the northwestern corner of the tank that would connect to Bell Street Park Place (see Figure 4). Up to approximately 6,000 square feet of new impervious surfaces would be developed at the Bell Street Park site associated with the improvements.
The Bell Street Park site would include an approximately 200-foot-long pipeline connection extending from the tank westward to connect to a water pipeline along Euclid Avenue.
The paved area would be fenced to restrict access to the rear portion of the Bell Street Park site. For security, the Bell Street Park site would be enclosed by a 6‑ to 8‑foot‑tall dark colored metal security fence. A metal gate would be installed at the site entrance along Bell Street Park Place.
Construction
Staging would be located on-site with a temporary area for construction laydown just south of the tank (near the front side of the tank) spanning approximately 600 square feet. A temporary construction trailer would be placed west of the tank (north of the pump station building) and would take up approximately 900 square feet of space.
Construction at the Bell Street Park site would begin with site preparation activities, which would include removal of existing vegetation. Trees located north of the tank would be removed to accommodate the components at the Bell Street Park site.
Following site preparation, construction activities would be the same as those described above for the Woodland site.
323
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 13 1266 Beech Street
Existing Site Conditions
Th site at 1266 Beech Street (Beech site) is located at the eastern boundary of the City, adjacent to the San Francisco Bay/San Francisco Baylands, and is approximately 1.11 acres (48,300 square feet). The Beech site is sited at the northern portion of a vacant, open space parcel spanning approximately
1.84 acres that is generally bounded by Beech Street to the north, Martin Luther King Park to the south, the San Francisco Bay and tidal salt marshes to the east, and residential uses to the west and southwest.
Residential uses are also located approximately 40 feet north across Beech Street. The Beech site’s zoning and land use designations are PR7 and Parks/Recreation/Conservation, respectively.
The Beech site is a vegetated, generally flat parcel. Trees are present at northwestern corner of the Beech site.
Proposed Components
Potential tank designs at the Beech site include steel or concrete tanks with varying storage capacities, as presented in Table 4. If the City proceeds with the Beech site, this site would include two concrete tanks or two steel tanks with approximately 1.6 MG or 1.5 MG of storage capacity, respectively. The conceptual design plan for the tanks and appurtenances at the Beech site is shown in Figure 5 and described below.
TABLE 4
1266 BEECH STREET SITE – PROPOSED TANK DIMENSIONS AND CAPACITIES Composition Diameter (feet) Height (feet) Capacity (MG) Concrete
100 35
1.6 Steel 1.5
Notes: The Beech site would include either two steel tanks or two concrete tanks.
The tank exteriors would include a neutral‑colored coating and/or architectural treatment intended to match the surrounding existing uses. Outdoor security lighting with motion sensors and light shielding would be installed. A 10‑foot‑wide landscaped buffer consisting of trees and shrubs is proposed along the Beech site perimeter to provide visual screening.
The tanks would be sited with a minimum 20-foot setback from the Beech site property lines. A paved access road and perimeter improvement would be constructed around the tanks. Access would be located along Beech Street, north of the tanks. Up to approximately 25,000 square feet of new impervious surfaces would be developed at the Beech site associated with the improvements. 7 PR, or Parks and Recreation Zone, provides for public parks including trails, community gardens, and other similar uses providing open space and conservation resources. Appropriate land uses include public recreational uses, including public parkland, open space, and associated recreational activities. Recreation facilities with an emphasis on outdoor use are also allowed. Other uses determined to be compatible with the primary uses may also be allowed. The allowable intensity is variable but shall be compatible with surrounding uses. 324
8''W 8''W 8''W 8''W 8''W
1266 BEECH STREET
APN = 063600060
ZONING = PR
APPROX. 80,500 SF
PUMP STATION
BUILDING
2500-GPM
BACKUP
GEN
TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION TRAILER
60' X 15'
TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION LAYDOWN
40' X 15'
X
X
X
X X X X
X
X
X
X X X X
10' TREE SCREENING STRIP
W
W
W
W
2500-GPM
W
W W W W
PROPOSED TANK #4B
DIAMETER = 100'
HEIGHT = 35'
STEEL TANK VOL. = 1.5 MG
CONCRETE TANK VOL. = 1.6 MG
PROPOSED TANK #4A
DIAMETER = 100'
HEIGHT = 35'
STEEL TANK VOL. = 1.5 MG
CONCRETE TANK VOL. = 1.6 MG
CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO
EAST PALO ALTO, C
MARCH 20
EKI C40163
G:\EKI_CONSTRUCTION_DWGS\C40163_EPATank\C40163_TankSiting.dwg, File date: 4/17/2026 9:53 PM, Print date: 4/21/2026 12:32 PM, by: Chris Pittner 0 SCALE:
20 1" = 40'
40 80 120
PLAN
LEGEND:
SETBACK
PROPERTY LINE
10" W EXISTING WATER LINE
PAVED AREAS
TANK SITE #4 CONCEPTUAL LAYO
1266 BEECH STRE
(FUTURE MLK PAR
FIGURE
PROPOSED WATER LINE 10''W
NOTES:
1. DIAMETERS SHOWN ARE EXTERIOR TANK
DIAMETERS.
LEGEND:
SETBACK
PROPERTY LINE
8" W EXISTING WATER LINE
PAVED AREAS
10''W PROPOSED WATER LINE
1. DIAMETERS SHOWN
ARE EXTERIOR TANK
DIAMETERS.
NOTES:
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study
Figure 5
Proposed Components - 1266 Beech Street Site
SOURCE: EKI, 2026; ESA, 2026
D201500591.11 - EPA Water Tank Siting Study\07 Graphics\Illustrator 0 SCALE:
20 1" = 40'
40 80 120
PUMP STATION
BUILDING INCL.
ELECTRICAL
APPROX. 450 SF”
BACKUP GENERATOR
APPROX. 100 SF
8” W PIPE
325
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 15 The Beech site would also include a pump station building (occupying approximately 450 square feet) and an emergency backup generator (occupying approximately 100 square feet), both located along the northeastern corner of the Beech site. The generator is anticipated to be approximately 125 to 150 kW.
Pump station capacity is expected to range from approximately 1,500 to 2,500 gpm. The Beech site would also include installation of two short section of new pipelines to connect to a water pipeline along Beech Street.
For security, the Beech site would be enclosed by a 6‑ to 8‑foot‑tall dark colored metal security fence. A metal gate would be installed at the site entrance along Beech Street.
Construction
Staging would be located on-site with a temporary area for construction laydown near the northwestern corner of the Beech site spanning approximately 600 square feet. A temporary construction trailer would be placed at the southwestern corner of the Beech site and would take up approximately 900 square feet of space.
Construction at the Beech site would begin with site preparation activities, which would include removal of existing vegetation. Tree removal would not to be needed at the Beech site.
Following site preparation, construction activities would be the same as those described above for the Woodland site.
326
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 16 Pulgas Avenue
Existing Site Conditions
The Pulgas Avenue site is located on a parcel at the end of Pulgas Avenue near the northeastern boundary of the City, adjacent to the San Francisco Bay/San Francisco Baylands. The parcel is approximately
4.68 acres. The Pulgas Avenue site would occupy approximately 0.87 acres (38,000 square feet) at the northwestern corner of the parcel. The Pulgas Avenue site is bounded by industrial buildings to the south and west, and tidal salt marshes and open space uses to the north and east, respectively. The Pulgas Avenue site is approximately 650 feet southwest of the San Francisco Bay Trail and Ravenswood Open Space Preserve and approximately 1,500 feet north/northwest of the intersection of Bay Road and Pulgas Avenue. The nearest residential uses from the Pulgas Avenue site are approximately 750 feet west. The Pulgas Avenue site is located within the Ravenswood Business District/Four Corners Specific Plan Area.
The Pulgas Avenue site’s land use and zoning designation is Waterfront Office8 (High-Intensity Office/Lab/Industrial).
The Pulgas Avenue site features an existing warehouse/industrial structure.
Proposed Components
Potential tank designs at the Pulgas Avenue site include either two steel tanks or two concrete tanks, each with an approximate diameter of 100 feet and a height of approximately 35 feet. The steel tank option would provide a storage capacity of approximately 1.5 MG per tank, while the concrete tank option would provide a slightly larger capacity of approximately 1.6 MG per tank. The conceptual design plan for the tanks and appurtenances at the Pulgas Avenue site is shown in Figure 6 and described below.
The tank exteriors would include a neutral‑colored coating and/or architectural treatment intended to match the surrounding existing uses. Outdoor security lighting with motion sensors and light shielding would be installed. A 10‑foot‑wide landscaped buffer consisting of trees and shrubs is proposed along the site perimeter to provide visual screening.
The tanks would be sited with a minimum 20-foot setback from the Pulgas Avenue site’s property lines.
A paved access road and perimeter improvement would be constructed around the tanks. Access would be located near the southeastern corner of the Pulgas Avenue site. Up to approximately 24,000 square feet of new impervious surfaces would be developed at the Pulgas Avenue site associated with the improvements.9
8 Waterfront Office is intended to create a higher intensity, urban office district within the Ravenswood Business District/Four Corners Specific Plan Area. This land use/zoning designation accommodates professional offices, research & development facilities, industrial and manufacturing uses, as permitted by zoning, and supports retail or similar uses. 9 The Pulgas Avenue site is within the same parcel as a planned multi-use athletics field to the west (EPA Waterfront Athletic Fields); however, the tanks are located at a portion of the parcel that is not currently planned for improvement. 327
X
X
X
X
PUMP STATION
BUILDING
2500-GPM
BACKUP
GEN
W
W
TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION TRAILER
60' X 15'
TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION LAYDOWN
40' X 15'
PROPOSED TANK #5A
DIAMETER = 100'
HEIGHT = 35'
STEEL TANK VOL. = 1.5 MG
CONCRETE TANK VOL. = 1.6 MG
PUMP STATION BUILDING
INCL. ELECTRICAL
APPROX. 450 SF
BACKUP GENERATOR
APPROX. 100 SF
PAVED ACCESS ROAD
X X
W W
PROPOSED TANK #5B
DIAMETER = 100'
HEIGHT = 35'
STEEL TANK VOL. = 1.5 MG
CONCRETE TANK VOL. = 1.6 MG
W W W W
W W W W
W W W W
W
W W W W W W
CITY OF EAST PALO A
EAST PALO ALTO
MARCH 2
EKI C4016
_
_
_
_
g_
g,
,
,
y
0 SCALE:
20 1" = 40'
40 80 120
PLAN
LEGEND:
SETBACK
PROPERTY LINE
10" W EXISTING WATER LINE
PAVED AREAS
TANK SITE #5 CONCEPTUAL LAYO
END OF PURDUE A
FUTURE ATHLETIC FIE
FIGUR
PROPOSED WATER LINE 10''W
NOTES:
1. DIAMETERS SHOWN ARE EXTERIOR TANK
DIAMETERS.
LEGEND:
SETBACK
PROPERTY LINE
PAVED AREAS
10''W PROPOSED WATER LINE
1. DIAMETERS SHOWN
ARE EXTERIOR TANK
DIAMETERS.
NOTES:
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study
Figure 6
Proposed Components - Pulgas Avenue Site
SOURCE: EKI, 2026
D201500591.11 - EPA Water Tank Siting Study\07 Graphics\Illustrator 0 SCALE:
20 1" = 40'
40 80 120
328
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 18 The Pulgas Avenue site would also include a pump station building (occupying approximately 450 square feet) and an emergency backup generator (occupying approximately 100 square feet), both located along the southeastern corner of the site. The generator is anticipated to be approximately 125 to 150 kW. Pump station capacity is expected to range from approximately 1,500 to 2,500 gpm. The Pulgas Avenue site would also include an approximately 250-foot-long pipeline connection to a water pipeline along Pulgas Avenue to the southeast.
For security, the Pulgas Avenue site would be enclosed by a 6‑ to 8‑foot‑tall dark colored metal security fence. A metal gate would be installed at the site entrance near the southeastern corner of the Pulgas Avenue site.
Construction
Staging would be located on-site with a temporary area for construction laydown near the southwestern corner of the Pulgas Avenue site spanning approximately 600 square feet. A temporary construction trailer would be placed just south of the laydown area and would take up approximately 900 square feet of space.
Construction at the Pulgas Avenue site would begin with site preparation activities, which would first include demolition of the existing warehouse/industrial structure. Tree removal would not to be needed at the Pulgas Avenue site.
Following site preparation, construction activities would be the same as those described above for the Woodland site.
Operations and Maintenance
Routine maintenance for all sites would include inspections, site housekeeping, landscape maintenance, and equipment servicing. Tank operations would include radio alarms/notifications and local data acquisition and would be designed to be compatible with supervisory control and data acquisition (also known as SCADA) control systems.
329
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 19 Screening Methodology
Resource topics were evaluated using the Appendix G checklist of the CEQA Guidelines. Google Earth was used for desktop surveys and analysis of the five sites. No fieldwork or site visit was conducted as part of this assessment.
Biological Resources
An ESA biologist reviewed publicly available and biological resources data for records of special-status plant and animal species and aquatic resources documented within the study areas and regional vicinity.
Data sources reviewed in this analysis include:
• Historic and current aerial imagery (Google Earth)
• California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB)
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) Official Species List for the five study areas
• California Native Plant Society (CNPS) online database • USFWS’s National Wetlands Inventory (NWI)
• USFWS’s Critical Habitat Mapper
Cultural Resources
In order to determine whether the five potential Project sites have sensitivity for significant cultural resources, ESA completed a preliminary cultural resources sensitivity analysis. As part of the sensitivity analysis, ESA conducted a records search of the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) at Sonoma State University (April 7, 2026, File No. 25-1496). The NWIC is the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) repository housing cultural resources records for 18 counties in Northern California, including San Mateo County. The study area for the records search included each of the five Project sites and areas within 0.25 miles. The background research included a review of NWIC base maps for previously recorded site records for the study area, and a review of the geological formations and soil chronology for each of the Project sites. The objectives of the background research were to determine whether known cultural resources had been recorded within or in the vicinity of each of the five Project sites and assess the likelihood of unrecorded cultural resources based on historical references and the distribution of environmental settings of nearby resources.
No tribal consultation was completed as part of this constraints analysis. For CEQA compliance, tribal consultation is required according to the provisions of Public Resources Code Section 21080.3(b) (Assembly Bill 52).
330
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 20 Analysis and Results by Resource Area
Aesthetics
Potential constraint. The Project sites are within the vicinity of residential, commercial, mixed-use, and/or community land uses. Installation of an approximately 35-foot-tall tank (in some cases, two tanks) and tank appurtenances would introduce public facility infrastructure that would be generally inconsistent with the visual character10 and visual quality11 of the surrounding neighborhoods. For example, the Project would introduce tall water tanks in previously undisturbed or vacant areas adjacent to residential development or open spaces. Even with neutral-colored coatings and architectural treatments, the industrial form and massing of the tanks could be visually dominant in comparison to existing nearby infrastructure such as single story residences and nearby natural resources such as creeks (e.g., San Francisquito Creek near the Woodland site) and open spaces (e.g., Don Edwards National Wildlife near the Beech site and Ravenswood Open Space Preserve near the Pulgas Avenue site). Because the Project sites currently act as buffers between residence and community and open spaces, tank(s) could interrupt existing scenic viewsheds12 for sensitive receptors.
13 Thus, Project implementation could result in a
potentially significant impacts on scenic vistas, as well as potentially conflict with applicable zoning (e.g., Title 18: Development Code) and other regulations governing scenic quality.
While each site would feature outdoor security lighting, lighting would be activated via motion sensors and would also be shielded. Tank exteriors would include a neutral‑colored coating. Therefore, Project implementation would create a new source of substantial light or glare which could adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.
None of the Project sites are adjacent to any designated or eligible county or state scenic highways; therefore, Project implementation would not substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway. 14 10 Visual character is the arrangement of a particular landscape as visually defined by the variety and intensity of the landscape features and the four basic visual elements of form, line, color, and texture, giving the landscape in view a distinctive quality. 11 Visual quality is the overall visual impression or attractiveness of a place as determined by the landscape characteristics, which may include landforms, rock forms, water features, and vegetation patterns. 12 A viewshed for a project is the surrounding geographic area from which a project is likely to be seen, based on topography, atmospheric conditions, land use patterns, and roadway orientations, including publicly accessible vantage points 13 For aesthetics, a sensitive receptor includes individuals or groups of individuals who have views of a site afforded by a scenic vista, scenic highway, residence, or public recreation area. 14 California Department of Transportation. 2026. California State Scenic Highway System Map. Accessed April 20, 2026. https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f1aacaa. 331
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 21 Agricultural and Forestry Resources, Geology and Soils, and Mineral Resources
No constraint. All five of the Project sites are located within land that is designated as “Urban and BuiltUp Land”15 by the California Department of Conservation’s Important Farmland Finder.16 There are no forestry resources within the Project sites.
The California Geological Survey (CGS) has classified lands within the San Francisco-Monterey Bay Region into Aggregate and Mineral Resources Zones (MRZ) based on guidelines adopted by the California State Mining and Geology Board. The City is mapped as MRZ-1, which is defined as an area where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits17 are present, or where little likelihood exists for their presence.18 The relatively small footprints and shallow depths of excavations (up to approximately 15 feet) are not anticipated to encounter economically viable mineral resources. The Project sites are not located within one mile of any active mining claims or operations nor any active or plugged oil wells.
The Woodland site and the Bell Street Park site are underlain by Quaternary deposits (Qhl).19 The 2474 Pulgas site is underlain by Holocene floodplain deposits (Qfhp).20 The Beech site is underlain by alluvial fan deposits (af), and the Pulgas Avenue site is underlain by Holocene basin deposits (Qhb). 21 Because
the Project is not likely to disturb previously undisturbed geologic units, impacts to paleontological resources or unique geologic features are not anticipated.
According to the CGS, none of the Project sites are located on an active earthquake fault.22 The nearest active fault zones are the San Andreas and the Hayward Fault Zones approximately 7 miles southwest and approximately 10 miles east of the Project sites, respectively. The Project sites are not within a mapped landslide zone.23 Additionally, according to the U.S. Geological Survey’s Landslide Inventory and Susceptibility Map, the Project sites have little to no landslide susceptibility.24 In the event of an earthquake at either fault zone, the Project sites would likely be subject to seismic shaking. According to the CGS, the Project sites are located within a mapped liquefaction zone, therefore, the Project sites could be at risk for settlement, lateral spreading, and damage to structures.25 Specifically, 15 The designation of “Urban and Built-Up Land” is defined as occupied by structures with a building density of at least 1 unit to 1.5 acres, or approximately six structures to a 10-acre parcel. Common examples include residential, industrial, commercial, institutional facilities, cemeteries, airports, golf courses, sanitary landfills, sewage treatment, and water control structures. 16 California Department of Conservation. 2026. California Important Farmland Finder. Accessed April 20, 2026. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/.
17 Significant mineral deposits are deposits that are marketable under present technological and economic conditions, or conditions that can be estimated to exist in the foreseeable future, containing more than $5 million worth of aggregate material in 1978-equivalent dollars.
18 City of East Palo Alto. 2017. Vista 2035 General Plan. March 2017. 19 Brabb, E.E., Graymer, R.W., & Jones, D.L. 2000. Geologic map and map database of the Palo Alto 30' x 60' quadrangle, California. June 2000.
20 Ibid.
21 Ibid.
22 California Geological Survey (CGS). 2026. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation. Accessed April 20, 2026. 23 Ibid.
24 U.S. Geological Survey. 2026. U.S. Landslide Inventory and Susceptibility. Accessed April 20, 2026. 25 California Geological Survey (CGS). 2026. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation. Accessed April 20, 2026. 332
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 22 the Pulgas Avenue, 2474 Pulgas, and Beech sites are located within the margins of the San Francisco Bay; therefore, ground water is anticipated to be shallow, and these sites could be susceptible to seismicinduced liquefaction. Design and Project implementation would adhere to applicable regulations such as the California Building Code, California Fire Code, and local City codes and regulations, as well as best management practices (BMPs) and/or mitigation measures, therefore potential impacts related to geology can be reduced.
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Energy, and Noise Potential constraint. The closest sensitive receptors26 from each Project site include:
• 1893 Woodland Avenue: Residences are located approximately 100 feet south/southeast. • 2474 Pulgas Avenue: Residences are located approximately 60 feet west/southwest, and the EPACENTER Youth Arts and Music Center is adjacent to the north. • Bell Street Park: A public park featuring a skate park and playground is immediately adjacent to the east and southeast, respectively.
• 1266 Beech Street: Residences are located immediately west and southwest and approximately 40 feet from the north.
• Pulgas Avenue: Residences are located approximately 750 feet west.
Construction would require the temporary use of construction vehicles and equipment, which could result in air quality impacts from particulate matter, including short-term generation of dust and equipment exhaust. Project operations would include use of the pump station building, as well as periodic use of the emergency backup generator. Additionally, operations would involve routine maintenance including inspections, site housekeeping, landscape maintenance, and equipment servicing, which would generate equipment exhaust. The operation of construction vehicles and equipment would also result in the shortterm generation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and electricity usage associated with the operations of a larger pump or new submersible pumps may result in a long-term increase in indirect generation of GHG emissions.
The Bay Area Air Quality Management District recommends that health risk assessments (HRAs) be prepared for the evaluation of diesel particulate matter related to construction activities that would occur within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors, and the Office of Health Hazard Assessment recommends that HRAs be prepared for construction activities that last more than two months. Due to the proximity of sensitive receptors, there is a potential for Project implementation to have health-risk-related impacts from the generation of diesel particulate matter, which is a toxic air contaminant.
The residences near each Project site may be subject to an increase in ambient noise levels during Project construction (e.g., grading, compaction, and trenching activities). In addition, operation of the new pump station and emergency backup generators may result in long-term increases in ambient noise levels. 26 For air quality, sensitive receptors are defined as facilities and land uses that include members of the population that are particularly sensitive to the effects of air pollutants, such as children, the elderly, and people with illnesses. Examples include schools, hospitals, and daycare centers. Residential areas are also considered sensitive to poor air quality because people usually stay home for extended periods of time, which results in greater exposure to ambient air quality. 333
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 23 Nighttime construction activities are not anticipated to the be required. Pumps used to convey water to/from the water tanks would be enclosed in the pump station building which would attenuate pumpgenerated noise. The emergency backup generator would be used periodically. Given the limited amount of construction that would be associated with the Project, the noise attenuation features, as well as the limited use of the emergency backup generator, combined with adherence to BMPs and/or mitigation measures, these potential impacts may be reduced.
Construction energy use would include both direct and indirect uses of energy. Direct energy use would include the consumption of fuel (typically gasoline and diesel fuel) for the use of construction equipment and vehicles. Energy in the form of electricity may also be consumed by some pieces of construction equipment, such as power tools, and lighting; however, the amount of electricity consumed would be relatively minimal. Operational electricity use would be greater than, or similar to, existing uses but would not be considered wasteful due to the City’s need for additional water storage tanks, as identified in its 2022 WSMP.
Biological Resources
Potential constraint. For all Project sites, migratory birds protected by state and federal law may nest within the trees or shrubs on-site. Potential impacts include direct impacts to nesting birds if riparian vegetation or trees were removed, and indirect impacts to nesting birds in the vicinity of the Project, which could be disturbed by construction-related noise, vibration, and/or increased level of human activity. In the event of tree or vegetation removal, or construction during migratory bird nesting season (typically February 1 to August 31), a nesting bird survey should be performed by a qualified biologist.
Any active nests should be avoided with a suitable buffer (typically 50 feet for songbirds in urban areas and 500 feet for raptors) until the young have fledged and are independent of the nest.
The City’s Tree Ordinance requires a permit for removal of any tree on private property having a main stem or trunk circumference of 25 inches or greater at 54 inches above grade (Diameter at Standard Height) and any tree within a public street or public ROW, regardless of size. If tree removal involves trees subject to the ordinance, the City must adhere to the requirements set forth by the tree ordinance.
None of the Project sites are located within areas covered by an approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Thus, Project implementation would not conflict with the provision of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.
1893 Woodland Avenue
Potential constraint. The Woodland site consists of a vacant parcel with several ornamental trees present within the site and at the perimeter, including oaks (Quercus sp.). The Woodland site is located between Woodland Avenue and the Bayshore Freeway, which represent barriers to terrestrial wildlife movement.
The ground surface appears disturbed and would not contain habitat for rare plants or wildlife. San Francisquito Creek is located across Woodland Avenue, protected by a concrete wall separating it from the roadway. Thus, construction on the Woodland site would not impact the creek or sensitive species within it, for example, steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss). No other biological constraints were identified for the Woodland site.
334
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 24 2474 Pulgas Avenue
Potential constraint. The 2474 Pulgas site is located near Bay Road. The 2474 Pulgas site is within an area of commercial development across the street from residential townhomes. The Bay Trail, abutting tidal marshland of San Francisco Bay, is located one block away (approximately 700 feet). Suitable nesting habitat for rail species is located at the bay side of the Bay Trail; however, because the habitat is 700 feet or more from the 2474 Pulgas site, there would be no impacts to nesting rails from construction at this location. No other biological constraints were identified for the 2474 Pulgas site.
Bell Street Park
Potential constraint. The Bell Street Park site is located in the midst of a densely developed neighborhood along University Avenue and near Highway 101. The Bell Street Park site includes mature trees, including oaks and palms, adjacent to a school property, senior center, pool, and playground. The major roads represent a barrier to terrestrial wildlife movement. There is no potential for special-status species at the Bell Street Park site. No other biological constraints were identified for the Bell Street Park site. 1266 Beech Street
Potential constraint. The Beech site is a vacant lot adjacent to the Bay Trail and tidal marshland of San Francisco Bay. Residences are located across the street, and Beech Street ends north of the Beech site, leading to open space abutting the Bay Trail. There is an expanse of disturbed (fill) land between the Beech site and the San Francisco Bay to buffer construction disturbance impacts; however, there could be potential impacts to nesting rails as the Beech site is approximately 200 feet west from tidal marsh, which may host nesting rails. A few trees are located along the perimeters of the Beech site on the southern and western sides.
CNDDB has a record of federal endangered and California fully protected Ridgway’s rail (Rallus obsoletus) from this part of the San Francisco Bay in 2018 (Occurrence #45, 85 rails).27 Construction within 700 feet of nesting rails would not be allowed between January 15 and August 31, unless protocollevel rail surveys were conducted with negative results in January of that same year.
Pulgas Avenue
Potential constraint. On the block of Pulgas north of Bay Road, the Pulgas Avenue site is north of Bloomhouse, with vacant grassland to the east, and tidal marsh to the north. Across the Bay trail (approximately 600 feet northeast) tidal marshland provides habitat for endangered rails (CNDDB occurrence #119;28 the muted tidal marsh west of the Bay Trail adjacent to the parcel does not have recorded rails but appears to contain suitable tidal marsh habitat). 29 A few trees and shrubs are present at
the perimeter of the Pulgas Avenue site to the south and west. Other adjacent land uses include commercial buildings, a towing company, truck storage and a trailer park. 2727 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2026. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). Accessed March 10, 2026.
28 Ibid.
29 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2026a. National Wetlands Inventory. Accessed March 11, 2026. 335
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 25 CNDDB has a record of federal- and state- endangered and California fully protected Ridgway’s rail (Rallus obscurus) from this part of the San Francisco Bay (Occurrence #119).30 There is no record of rails west of the Bay Trail but there appears to be suitable tidal marsh habitat. Construction within 700 feet of nesting rails would not be allowed between January 15 and August 31 unless protocol-level rail surveys were conducted with negative results in January of that same year.
Cultural Resources
1893 Woodland Avenue
Potential constraint. The Woodland site has a high sensitivity for buried pre-contact archaeological resources. The Woodland site is approximately 800 feet southwest of previously recorded archaeological site P-43-000578. The P-43-000578 site is a pre-contact archaeological site consisting of midden soils, Olivella beads, bird bone whistles, bone awls, and cut and polished bone tubes.31 Additionally, the Woodland site is underlain by recent Holocene-era quaternary alluvium and stream deposits.32 Soils associated with this proposed location consist of Botella alluvial fans.33 This soil forms on Holocene-age marine deposits and due to their age have a high potential to contain deeply buried, intact pre-contact archaeological resources.
The Woodland site is currently vacant, with foundations from a former mobile home park. The mobile homes appear on historic aerials from the 1940s. Historic topographic maps do not show any buildings or structures from the 1890s through the mid-twentieth century. Therefore, there is a low sensitivity for buried historic-era archaeological resources at the Woodland site.
Based on the above assessment, the Woodland site has a high sensitivity for pre-contact archaeological resources and a low sensitivity for historic-era archaeological resources. 2474 Pulgas Avenue
Potential constraint. The 2474 Pulgas site has a moderate sensitivity for pre-contact archaeological resources. There are no known pre-contact resources in or within 0.25 miles of the 2474 Pulgas site, although, the underlying geology and soil chronology of the area does present sensitivity for encountering deeply buried archaeological resources. The 2474 Pulgas site is underlain by recent Holocene-era quaternary alluvium and stream deposits.34 Soils associated with this proposed location consist of Botella alluvial fans.35 This soil forms on Holocene-age marine deposits and due to their age have a high potential to contain deeply buried, intact archaeological resources. 30 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2026. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). Accessed March 10, 2026.
31 Bocek, B. & Rutherford, J. 1985. P-43-000578 DPR 523 Form. On file at California Historical Resources Information System, Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, CA. 32 Wagner, D.L., Bortugno, E.J., & McJunkin, R.D. 1991. Geologic Map of the San Francisco-San Jose Quadrangle, California, 1:250,000.
33 Schoeneberger, P.J., D.A. Wysocki, E.C. Benham, & Soil Survey Staff. 2012. Field book for describing and sampling soils, Version 3.0. Natural Resources Conservation Service, National Soil Survey Center, Lincoln, NE. 34 Wagner, D.L., Bortugno, E.J., & McJunkin, R.D. 1991. Geologic Map of the San Francisco-San Jose Quadrangle, California, 1:250,000. 35 Schoeneberger, P.J., D.A. Wysocki, E.C. Benham, & Soil Survey Staff. 2012. Field book for describing and sampling soils, Version 3.0. Natural Resources Conservation Service, National Soil Survey Center, Lincoln, NE. 336
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 26 The 2474 Pulgas site is currently vacant and does not have any previous construction that could have significantly disturbed the subsurface or present historic-era archaeological resources such as foundations or artifact concentrations.
Two historic-era architectural resources (P-41-002355 and P-41-002590) are within 0.25 miles of the 2474 Pulgas site; these resources would not be impacted by Project implementation. 2519 Pulgas Avenue (P-41-002355) is a historic-era architectural resource consisting of a nursery with two cutting houses, a broiler building, and a warehouse.36 The resource is located 600 feet north of the 2474 Pulgas site. 1905 Bay Road (P-41-0002590) is a segment of Bay Road between Clarke Avenue and Cooley Landing Regional Park.37 The resource is 400 feet north of the 2474 Pulgas site. Both of these historic-era resources have been recommended not eligible for the California Register of Historic Resources (California Register) and the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) and would not be impacted by Project implementation.
Based on the above assessment, the 2474 Pulgas site has a moderate sensitivity for pre-contact archaeological resources and a low sensitivity for historic-era archaeological resources.
Bell Street Park
Potential constraint. The Bell Street Park site has a high sensitivity for buried pre-contact archaeological resources. The Bell Street Park site is approximately 1,000 feet southeast of previously recorded archaeological site P-41-000258. The P-41-000258 site is a pre-contact archaeological site consisting of a burial of a pre-adolescent individual and associated grave goods including two Haliotis pendants, Olivella beads, and baked clay with basket impressions.38 Additionally, the Bell Street Park site is underlain by recent Holocene-era quaternary alluvium and stream deposits.39 Soils associated with this proposed location consist of Botella alluvial fans.40 This soil forms on Holocene-age marine deposits and due to their age have a high potential to contain deeply buried, intact archaeological resources.
The Bell Street Park site is the location of a former residential neighborhood and there is the potential for buried historic-era archaeological resources associated with previous residences such as foundations, footings, or artifact concentrations. The Bell Street Park site is currently a park, which could have capped historic-ear archaeological resources, if they were present.
Based on the above assessment, the Bell Street Park site has a high sensitivity for pre-contact archaeological resources and a moderate sensitivity for historic-era archaeological resources. 36 Hill, Ward. 2013. P-41-002355 DPR 523 Form. On file at California Historical Resources Information System, Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, CA. 37 Melvin, S. & Brookshear, C. 2014. P-41-002590. DPR 523 Form. On file at California Historical Resources Information System, Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, CA. 38 Bocek, B. & Rutherford, J. 1985. P-43-000578 DPR 523 Form. On file at California Historical Resources Information System, Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, CA. 39 Wagner, D.L., Bortugno, E.J., & McJunkin, R.D. 1991. Geologic Map of the San Francisco-San Jose Quadrangle, California, 1:250,000. 40 Schoeneberger, P.J., D.A. Wysocki, E.C. Benham, & Soil Survey Staff. 2012. Field book for describing and sampling soils, Version 3.0. Natural Resources Conservation Service, National Soil Survey Center, Lincoln, NE. 337
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 27 1266 Beech Street
Potential constraint. The Beech site has a moderate sensitivity for pre-contact archaeological resources.
There are no known pre-contact archaeological resources in or within 0.25 miles of the Beech site, although, the underlying geology and soil chronology of the area does present a higher sensitivity for encountering deeply buried archaeological resources. The Beech site is underlain by recent Holocene-era quaternary alluvium and stream deposits.41 Soils associated with this proposed location consist of Botella alluvial fans.42 This soil forms on Holocene-age marine deposits and due to their age have a high potential to contain deeply buried, intact archaeological resources.
The Beech site is currently vacant and does not have any previous construction that could have significantly disturbed the subsurface or present historic-era archaeological resources, such as foundations or artifact concentrations.
Based on the above assessment, the Beech site has a moderate sensitivity for pre-contact archaeological resources and a low sensitivity for historic-era archaeological resources.
Pulgas Avenue
Potential constraint. The Pulgas Avenue site has a high sensitivity for buried pre-contact archaeological resources. The Pulgas Avenue site is approximately 650 feet west of previously recorded archaeological site P-41-000080, also known as the University Village Site, which is a pre-contact archaeological site consisting of burials with associated burial artifacts such as charmstones, mortars, pestles, sinkers, and chert points.43 Additionally, the Pulgas Avenue site is underlain by recent Holocene-era quaternary alluvium and stream deposits.44 Soils associated with this proposed location consist of Botella alluvial fans.45 This soil forms on Holocene-age marine deposits and due to their age have a high potential to contain deeply buried, intact archaeological resources.
The Pulgas Avenue site was undeveloped until the 1980s and there is a low potential for buried historicera archaeological features, such as foundations or artifact concentrations.
Based on the above assessment, the Pulgas Avenue site has a high sensitivity for pre-contact archaeological resources and a low sensitivity for historic-era archaeological resources.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials and Wildfire
Potential constraint. In California, Government Code Section 65962.5 requires the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) to maintain regulatory 41 Wagner, D.L., Bortugno, E.J., & McJunkin, R.D. 1991. Geologic Map of the San Francisco-San Jose Quadrangle, California, 1:250,000. 42 Schoeneberger, P.J., D.A. Wysocki, E.C. Benham, & Soil Survey Staff. 2012. Field book for describing and sampling soils, Version 3.0. Natural Resources Conservation Service, National Soil Survey Center, Lincoln, NE. 43 Abe. 1952. P-41-000080 DPR 523 Form. On file at California Historical Resources Information System, Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park, CA. 44 Wagner, D.L., Bortugno, E.J., & McJunkin, R.D. 1991. Geologic Map of the San Francisco-San Jose Quadrangle, California, 1:250,000. 45 Schoeneberger, P.J., D.A. Wysocki, E.C. Benham, & Soil Survey Staff. 2012. Field book for describing and sampling soils, Version 3.0. Natural Resources Conservation Service, National Soil Survey Center, Lincoln, NE. 338
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 28 databases of hazardous materials sites, commonly known as the Cortese List.46 According to the Cortese List, the 2474 Pulgas site is designated as a “Open – Site Assessment”.47,48 None of the other Project sites are located on or near a known hazardous materials site. Investigations starting in the 1980s identified arsenic contamination in soil and groundwater on the nearby 1990 Bay Road property and properties in the vicinity, including adjacent off-site portions of the Bains property (i.e., the 2474 Pulgas site).49 Because the 2474 Pulgas site is located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, there is a potential impact related hazardous materials.
Construction, operation and maintenance vehicles, equipment, and materials may use fuels, oil and grease, paints and thinners, and cleaning solvents. However, spill prevention measures would be implemented to address the accidental or inadvertent releases into adjacent waterways, which would prevent potential construction-related impacts on water quality. Additionally, the Project would conform to federal, state, and local hazardous waste regulations.
None of the Project sites are located within 0.25 miles of an existing or proposed school. There are no airports within 2 miles of the Project sites; therefore, the Project is not anticipated to result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Project area. Temporary traffic disruptions could occur during construction that include temporary lane closures; however, full roadway closures would not occur. Construction would also use flaggers to manage traffic flow and maintain emergency access during the duration of construction; therefore, interference with emergency access, emergency response plan, or emergency evacuation plan is not anticipated.
Government Code 51175-89 directs the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) to identify areas of very high fire hazard severity zones within Local Responsibility Areas (LRA).
Based on CALFIRE’s mapping of San Mateo County’s Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ), the Project sites are located in non-VHFHSZs (i.e., not within a high fire hazard zone) under LRAs and state or federal Responsibility Areas.
50 Therefore, Project implementation is not anticipated to expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires.
46 The Cortese List identifies sites with suspected and confirmed releases of hazardous materials into subsurface soil or groundwater. The listed sites can be accessed through the State Water Resources Control Board’s GeoTracker database, which includes leaking underground storage tanks, permitted underground storage tanks, U.S. Department of Defense sites, and Cleanup Program sites. Additionally, the DTSC EnviroStor database provides information for state and federal response sites; voluntary school and military cleanups; corrective actions; and permitted sites. 47 According to the SWRCB, “Open – Site Assessment” means site characterization, investigation, risk evaluation, and/or site conceptual model development are occurring at the site. Examples of site assessment activities include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) identification of the contaminants and the investigation of their potential impacts; (2) determination of the threats/impacts to water quality; (3) evaluation of the risk to humans and ecology; (4) delineation of the nature and extent of contamination; (5) delineation of the contaminant plume(s); and (6) development of the Site Conceptual Model. 48 State Water Resources Control Board. 2026. GeoTracker – City of East Palo Alto Library (T10000022545). Accessed April 21, 2026. https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?global_id=T10000022545. 49 Cornerstone Earth Group. 2021. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment. November 19, 2021. 50 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2008. San Mateo County Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. November 24, 2008.
339
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 29 Hydrology and Water Quality
No constraint. Due to the proximity of construction activities to surface water bodies (e.g., the San Francisco Bay and San Francisquito Creek), there is a potential to violate water quality standards, waste discharge requirements, or otherwise degrade surface water in the area. However, adherence to applicable laws and regulations governing erosion control and implementation of construction BMPs would be followed during construction activities to prevent potential water quality impacts on surface water bodies.
For example, Project implementation would adhere to the City’s Stormwater Management and Discharge Ordinance (Municipal Code Section 13.12.070), which prohibits any discharge of non-stormwater discharges to the City storm drainage system, including, but not limited to, pool water, car wash water, landscape irrigation water, sediment, and hazardous waste. Therefore, Project implementation would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality.
Construction would require a maximum excavation depth of approximately 15 feet. As discussed above, the Project sites are located within a CGS liquefaction zone.51 According to the San Francisco Bay Area Planning and Urban Research Association (also known as “SPUR”), the City is particularly vulnerable to sea level and shallow groundwater rise because it is low-lying and directly adjacent to the San Francisco Bay and San Francisquito Creek, and that shallow groundwater levels are 0 feet to 6 feet below the ground across the City’s eastern half.52 Additionally, a groundwater monitoring report prepared for the City in 2017 demonstrated that groundwater depths are generally shallower along the eastern boundary of the City (i.e., near the San Francisco Bay).53 Although the Project would require relatively minimal excavation depths, because three of the Project sites (Pulgas Avenue, 2474 Pulgas, and Beech sites) are located along the margins of the San Francisco Bay, there is potential to encounter groundwater during construction, which would likely require dewatering.
In the event that groundwater is encountered during Project construction and dewatering is needed, groundwater would be handled and discharged in accordance with state and federal regulations. For example, it is anticipated that the City would acquire permits under the Clean Water Act (e.g., Section 401 Water Quality Certification and/or State Waste Discharge Requirements) with the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board. Therefore, the Project is not anticipated to violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements; substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the Project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin; nor conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.
Project implementation would result in the development of new impervious surfaces ranging from up to approximately 6,000 square feet at the Bell Street Park site to approximately 28,000 square feet at the Woodland site. As discussed, the Project sites are located on predominantly flat terrain/minimal slope variation, thus, the potential for the Project to results in conditions of erosion would be minimal. The Project is anticipated to comply with applicable erosion control BMPs, which would reduce the potential for erosion or siltation, increased surface runoff rates or volumes, and the impediment or redirection of 51 California Geological Survey (CGS). 2026. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation. Accessed April 20, 2026. 52 San Francisco Bay Area Planning and Urban Research Association (SPUR). 2024. Look Out Below. May 2024. 53 Todd Groundwater. 2017. Groundwater Monitoring Report. January 2017. 340
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 30 flood flows. Furthermore, the design and construction of the Project would be subject to the City’s development standards under Title 18, which include standards to minimize impervious surface areas for all new development. Thus, implementation the Project is not anticipated to substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces.
According to the CGS, none of the Project sites are located within a tsunami hazard zone.54,55 The Project would not involve the placement of habitable structures, such as residences. Therefore, Project implementation would not risk release of pollutants due to inundation.
Social Resources
Potential constraint. Project implementation would not physically divide an established community. The zoning and land use designations for each site are summarized in Table 5. As demonstrated in Table 5, installation of tanks (i.e., water storage) is not an intended primary use at any of the five sites (i.e., major utilities at these locations is not the intended type of land use). Potential land use conflicts with construction at the Woodland site is that it has been identified by the City as a prime housing site.
However, the City has provided that the Woodland site is not a Housing Inventory Site.56 Potential land use conflicts at the 2474 Pulgas site could result from its location within the City’s intended business district (Ravenwood Business District) and its adjacency to a youth community (EPACENTER Youth Arts and Music Center). Potential land use conflicts at the Bell Street Park site could arise because the site occupies a portion of an existing public park; public park uses and water tanks are generally incompatible, particularly when Project implementation could reduce available public or recreational space.57 Potential land use conflicts at the Beech site relate to the property being owned by San Mateo County and currently functioning as open space between single‑family residences and the San Francisco Baylands. As noted above, park/open space uses and water tanks are typically incompatible, especially where construction would reduce space for public or recreational land. Finally, potential land use conflicts at the Pulgas Avenue site would result from its location being adjacent to a proposed athletic field prioritized as part of the larger Civic Commons project, creating potential compatibility concerns with open/recreational space. 54 It should be noted that some of the Project sites, such as the Pulgas Avenue, 2474 Pulgas, and Beech sites, are located along the margins of the San Francisco Bay, which has been designated a tsunami hazard area. 55 California Geological Survey (CGS). 2026. Tsunami Hazard Area Map. Accessed April 21, 2026. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/ts_evacuation/. 56 As part of its 2023–2031 Housing Element, and in accordance with the State-mandated Regional Housing Needs Assessment (also known as “RHNA”), the City identified sites for future residential development in an inventory referred to as the Housing Inventory Site. 57 The partially buried tank at the Bell Street Park site would create a slope feature (i.e., a hill) along the front side of the tank, which may be accessible to the public as a new park feature. 341
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 31 TABLE 5
PROJECT ZONING AND LAND DESIGNATIONS AND PERMIT NEEDS
Name Zoning Land Use Designation Intended Primary Uses Permit Type 1893 Woodland
Avenue R-MD-1 Medium Density Residential Apartment and other multi-family residential buildings.
Conditional Use
Permit
2474 Pulgas
Avenuea
Public
Institutional Public/Institutional
Public facilities such as City
buildings, public schools, and
police stations.
Conditional Use
Permit
Bell Street Park
Parks and
Recreation Parks/Recreation/Conservation Public parks, open spaces, and associated recreational activities.
Administrative
1266 Beech Use Permit
Street
Pulgas Avenuea Waterfront
Office
High-Intensity
Office/Lab/Industrial
Professional offices, research &
development facilities, and retail
or similar uses.
Conditional Use
Permit
Note:
a. Located within the Ravenswood Business District/Four Corners Specific Plan Area.
In accordance with the City’s development code (Title 18), construction at the five Project sites would require obtaining either an administrative use permit (AUP) or a conditional use permit (CUP).58 Although Project implementation would require an AUP/CUP and would be generally inconsistent with the intended land use designations and adjacent uses, such allowed uses would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted by an agency with jurisdiction over the Project for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Also, as discussed above under “Biological Resources,” the City would acquire a permit for removal of trees, in accordance with the City’s tree ordinance.
The purpose of the Project is to assess five potential sites that could collectively store approximately
3.0 MG located throughout the City so that the City can meet its current storage needs. Project implementation would not change the zoning or general plan designation, including zoning and land use designations under the Ravenswood Business District/Four Corners Specific Plan Area. Furthermore, Project implementation would not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan.
Project implementation would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure), nor displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. The Project does not include recreation facilities. 58 In accordance with Chapter 18 of the City’s municipal code, administrative use permits (AUP) and conditional use permits (CUP) are two distinct procedures for reviewing land uses which may be appropriate in the applicable zone, but whose effects on a site and surroundings cannot be determined before being proposed for a specific site. An AUP is used for lower‑impact uses that meet established zoning standards and can be approved by staff without a public hearing because they are not expected to create substantial land use or environmental conflicts. A CUP is required for higher‑impact or potentially incompatible uses that warrant discretionary review and a public hearing so that conditions can be imposed to ensure land use compatibility.
342
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 32 The Project does not include new or physically altered governmental facilities. Because there would be no increase in population, there would be no impacts related to population and housing, public services, or recreation.
As discussed above, the implementation of the Project would result in the construction of new water facilities, including new water pipelines and connections to existing water pipelines. Therefore, Project implementation could result in impacts related to utilities and service systems.
Transportation
No constraint. Construction and staging would be primarily limited on the Project sites. Temporary traffic disruptions could occur particularly during installation of pipelines in the public ROW. These disruptions could include temporary lane closures; however, full roadway closures would not occur. If temporary lane closures are needed, the City would be required to obtain encroachment permits for any work within the public ROW, which typically include requirements for maintaining safe traffic operations. While lane closures may temporarily interrupt the flow of traffic, including, for example, pedestrians, cyclists, and public transportation, construction would be temporary. The flow of traffic would return to pre-existing conditions upon completion of construction. Thus, the Project would not interfere with any existing or planned bicycle, pedestrian, or transit facilities, and would not make any changes to existing roadways or driveways that would affect operating conditions for vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians on roadways near the Project sites. Due to the small and limited nature of construction, construction crews would be minimal, come from local areas, and would not introduce a substantial new source of traffic in the area, thus, would not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b). Project implementation does not include/propose to change the transportation system nor its intended uses; therefore, would not increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible use. Because no full roadway closures would be required, and because of the availability of multiple routes to access the Project sites, interference with emergency access is not anticipated. Project construction activities would be coordinated with local law enforcement, fire protection, and emergency medical agencies, as required. 343
East Palo Alto Water Tank Siting Study Environmental Screening Assessment Memorandum 33 Anticipated CEQA Documentation
Based on the analysis and determinations presented above, preparation of an Initial Study (IS) is the appropriate initial approach to meet the requirements of CEQA (CEQA Guidelines Section 15063).
CEQA Guidelines Section 15063(a) directs a Lead Agency to prepare an IS to determine whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment. At this stage, the information available for the five Project sites does not seem to indicate the presence of unusual circumstances, complex environmental constraints, or substantial evidence of significant, unavoidable impacts that would necessitate immediate preparation of an environmental impact report (EIR). However, preliminary review, as presented above, does indicate that Project implementation could have potentially significant impacts, which suggests that preparation of an IS would be needed to appropriately determine the potential impacts.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15070(b) directs that “a public agency shall prepare … a proposed negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration for a project subject to CEQA when the initial study identifies potentially significant effects, but (a) revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by the applicant before a proposed mitigated negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and (b) there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the agency, that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment.” If the IS determines that potentially significant impacts can be avoided or reduced to a less‑than‑significant level through Project revisions or feasible mitigation measures, and the record contains no substantial evidence of remaining significant effects, CEQA directs the Lead Agency to prepare a Negative Declaration (ND) or a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). Specifically, an ND would be appropriate if the IS demonstrates that Project implementation would not result in any significant environmental effects, while an MND would be appropriate if the IS identifies potentially significant environmental impacts that can be reduced to a less‑than‑significant level through incorporation of feasible mitigation measures, as provided in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.
344
Attachment E
Site Specific Opinions of Probable Cost
345
Unit Qty. Unit Price Item Cost
LS 1 $500,000 $500,000
LS 1 $60,000 $60,000
LS 1 $80,000 $80,000
CY 600 $35 $21,000
LS 1 $100,000 $100,000
LS 1 $60,000 $60,000
LS 1 $200,000 $200,000
LS 1 $90,000 $90,000
Booster Pump Skid LS 1 $130,000 $130,000
LS 1 $78,000 $78,000
LS 1 $150,000 $150,000
CY 20479 $15 $307,185
SF 24000 $15 $360,000
$2,136,185
MG 2 $4,100,000 $4,100,000
MG 1 $2,975,000 $2,975,000
$7,075,000
$3,177,859
$211,857
$317,786
$1,381,678
$14,300,365
% 10 $1,430,036 $1,430,036
% 10 $1,430,036 $1,430,036
% 2 $286,007 $286,007
% 0.5 $71,502 $71,502
$3,217,582
$17,517,947
-30% $12,262,563
50% $26,276,920
Environmental and Permitting
Administration
Subtotal Soft Costs
Grand Total
Opinion of Probable Cost
Site #1: 1893 Woodland Ave, Concrete Tanks
Pump Station Building
Backup Generator
Contractor OHP (15%)
Total Direct Costs
Soft Costs
Engineering
Construction Management
Prestressed Concrete Tank and
Standard Appurtenances
(Includes Disinfection and
Hydrostatic Testing)
Subtotal Direct Costs
Contingency (30%)
Insurance and Bonds (2%)
Escalation/Market Uncertainty (3%)
Excavation (Cut and Fill)
Asphalt Paving
Subtotal Direct Costs
Major Equipment
Prestressed Concrete Tank and
Standard Appurtenances
(Includes Disinfection and
Hydrostatic Testing)
Aggregate Base Rock
Catch Basin and Site Drainage
Site Restoration
Piping and Appurtenances
Electrical and Appurtenances
Item Description
Site Work
Mobilization
SWPPP/Monitoring
Temporary Sheeting and
(EKI C40163.00) 1 of 9
EKI Environment & Water, Inc.
July 2026
346
Unit Qty. Unit Price Item Cost
LS 1 $500,000 $500,000
LS 1 $60,000 $60,000
LS 1 $80,000 $80,000
CY 600 $35 $21,000
LS 1 $100,000 $100,000
LS 1 $60,000 $60,000
LS 1 $200,000 $200,000
LS 1 $90,000 $90,000
Booster Pump Skid LS 1 $130,000 $130,000
LS 1 $78,000 $78,000
LS 1 $150,000 $150,000
CY 21735.2 $15 $326,028
SF 24000 $15 $360,000
$2,155,028
MG 2.1 $2,187,578 $2,187,578
MG 0.94 $1,410,705 $1,410,705
$3,598,283
$1,984,892
$132,326
$198,489
$862,997
$8,932,015
% 10 $893,202 $893,202
% 10 $893,202 $893,202
% 2 $178,640 $178,640
% 0.5 $44,660 $44,660
$2,009,703
$10,941,718
-30% $7,659,203
50% $16,412,578
Environmental and Permitting
Administration
Subtotal Soft Costs
Grand Total
Opinion of Probable Cost
Site #1: 1893 Woodland Ave, Steel Tanks
Pump Station Building
Backup Generator
Contractor OHP (15%)
Total Direct Costs
Soft Costs
Engineering
Construction Management
Welded Steel Tank and
Standard Appurtenances
(Includes Coating, Cathodic
Protection, Disinfection, and
Hydrostatic Testing)
Subtotal Direct Costs
Contingency (30%)
Insurance and Bonds (2%)
Escalation/Market Uncertainty (3%)
Excavation (Cut and Fill)
Asphalt Paving
Subtotal Direct Costs
Major Equipment
Welded Steel Tank and
Standard Appurtenances
(Includes Coating, Cathodic
Protection, Disinfection, and
Hydrostatic Testing)
Aggregate Base Rock
Catch Basin and Site Drainage
Site Restoration
Piping and Appurtenances
Electrical and Appurtenances
Item Description
Site Work
Mobilization
SWPPP/Monitoring
Temporary Sheeting and
(EKI C40163.00) 2 of 9
EKI Environment & Water, Inc.
July 2026
347
Unit Qty. Unit Price Item Cost
LS 1 $500,000 $500,000
LS 1 $60,000 $60,000
LS 1 $80,000 $80,000
CY 600 $35 $21,000
LS 1 $100,000 $100,000
LS 1 $60,000 $60,000
LS 1 $200,000 $200,000
LS 1 $90,000 $90,000
Booster Pump Skid LS 1 $130,000 $130,000
LS 1 $78,000 $78,000
LS 1 $150,000 $150,000
CY 18830.9 $15 $282,464
SF 11750 $15 $176,250
$1,927,714
MG 3 $5,225,000 $5,225,000
$5,225,000
$2,467,686
$164,512
$246,769
$1,072,907
$11,104,589
% 10 $1,110,459 $1,110,459
% 10 $1,110,459 $1,110,459
% 2 $222,092 $222,092
% 0.5 $55,523 $55,523
$2,498,532
$13,603,121
-30% $9,522,185
50% $20,404,682
Administration
Subtotal Soft Costs
Grand Total
Opinion of Probable Cost
Site #2: 2474 Pulgas Avenue, Concrete Tank
Pump Station Building
Backup Generator
Total Direct Costs
Soft Costs
Engineering
Construction Management
Environmental and Permitting
Subtotal Direct Costs
Contingency (30%)
Insurance and Bonds (2%)
Escalation/Market Uncertainty (3%)
Contractor OHP (15%)
Excavation (Cut and Fill)
Asphalt Paving
Subtotal Direct Costs
Major Equipment
Prestressed Concrete Tank and
Standard Appurtenances
(Includes Disinfection and
Hydrostatic Testing)
Aggregate Base Rock
Catch Basin and Site Drainage
Site Restoration
Piping and Appurtenances
Electrical and Appurtenances
Item Description
Site Work
Mobilization
SWPPP/Monitoring
Temporary Sheeting and
(EKI C40163.00) 3 of 9
EKI Environment & Water, Inc.
July 2026
348
Unit Qty. Unit Price Item Cost
LS 1 $500,000 $500,000
LS 1 $60,000 $60,000
LS 1 $80,000 $80,000
CY 600 $35 $21,000
LS 1 $100,000 $100,000
LS 1 $60,000 $60,000
LS 1 $200,000 $200,000
LS 1 $90,000 $90,000
Booster Pump Skid LS 1 $130,000 $130,000
LS 1 $78,000 $78,000
LS 1 $150,000 $150,000
CY 20529.1 $15 $307,937
SF 11750 $15 $176,250
$1,953,187
MG 3 $2,767,326 $2,767,326
$2,767,326
$1,628,577
$108,572
$162,858
$708,077
$7,328,597
% 10 $732,860 $732,860
% 10 $732,860 $732,860
% 2 $146,572 $146,572
% 0.5 $36,643 $36,643
$1,648,934
$8,977,532
-30% $6,284,272
50% $13,466,297
Administration
Subtotal Soft Costs
Grand Total
Opinion of Probable Cost
Site #2: 2474 Pulgas Avenue, Steel Tank
Pump Station Building
Backup Generator
Total Direct Costs
Soft Costs
Engineering
Construction Management
Environmental and Permitting
Subtotal Direct Costs
Contingency (30%)
Insurance and Bonds (2%)
Escalation/Market Uncertainty (3%)
Contractor OHP (15%)
Excavation (Cut and Fill)
Asphalt Paving
Subtotal Direct Costs
Major Equipment
Welded Steel Tank and
Standard Appurtenances
(Includes Coating, Cathodic
Protection, Disinfection, and
Hydrostatic Testing)
Aggregate Base Rock
Catch Basin and Site Drainage
Site Restoration
Piping and Appurtenances
Electrical and Appurtenances
Item Description
Site Work
Mobilization
SWPPP/Monitoring
Temporary Sheeting and
(EKI C40163.00) 4 of 9
EKI Environment & Water, Inc.
July 2026
349
Unit Qty. Unit Price Item Cost
LS 1 $500,000 $500,000
LS 1 $60,000 $60,000
LS 1 $80,000 $80,000
CY 600 $35 $21,000
LS 1 $100,000 $100,000
LS 1 $60,000 $60,000
LS 1 $200,000 $200,000
LS 1 $90,000 $90,000
Booster Pump Skid LS 1 $130,000 $130,000
LS 1 $78,000 $78,000
LS 1 $150,000 $150,000
CY 4654.21 $15 $69,813
SF 1800 $15 $27,000
$1,565,813
MG 0.66 $2,550,000 $2,550,000
$2,550,000
$1,419,956
$94,664
$141,996
$617,372
$6,389,800
% 10 $638,980 $638,980
% 10 $638,980 $638,980
% 2 $127,796 $127,796
% 0.5 $31,949 $31,949
$1,437,705
$7,827,505
-30% $5,479,253
50% $11,741,257
Administration
Subtotal Soft Costs
Grand Total
Opinion of Probable Cost
Site #3: Bell Street Park, Concrete Tank
Pump Station Building
Backup Generator
Total Direct Costs
Soft Costs
Engineering
Construction Management
Environmental and Permitting
Subtotal Direct Costs
Contingency (30%)
Insurance and Bonds (2%)
Escalation/Market Uncertainty (3%)
Contractor OHP (15%)
Excavation (Cut and Fill)
Asphalt Paving
Subtotal Direct Costs
Major Equipment
Prestressed Concrete Tank and
Standard Appurtenances
(Includes Disinfection and
Hydrostatic Testing)
Aggregate Base Rock
Catch Basin and Site Drainage
Site Restoration
Piping and Appurtenances
Electrical and Appurtenances
Item Description
Site Work
Mobilization
SWPPP/Monitoring
Temporary Sheeting and
(EKI C40163.00) 5 of 9
EKI Environment & Water, Inc.
July 2026
350
Unit Qty. Unit Price Item Cost
LS 1 $500,000 $500,000
LS 1 $60,000 $60,000
LS 1 $80,000 $80,000
CY 600 $35 $21,000
LS 1 $100,000 $100,000
LS 1 $60,000 $60,000
LS 1 $200,000 $200,000
LS 1 $90,000 $90,000
Booster Pump Skid LS 1 $130,000 $130,000
LS 1 $78,000 $78,000
LS 1 $150,000 $150,000
CY 21525.6 $15 $322,883
SF 11500 $15 $172,500
$1,964,383
MG 1.6 $3,625,000 $3,625,000
MG 1.6 $3,625,000 $3,625,000
$7,250,000
$3,178,962
$211,931
$317,896
$1,382,158
$14,305,330
% 10 $1,430,533 $1,430,533
% 10 $1,430,533 $1,430,533
% 2 $286,107 $286,107
% 0.5 $71,527 $71,527
$3,218,699
$17,524,030
-30% $12,266,821
50% $26,286,044
Environmental and Permitting
Administration
Subtotal Soft Costs
Grand Total
Opinion of Probable Cost
Site #4: 1266 Beech Street (Future MLK Park), Concrete Tanks Pump Station Building
Backup Generator
Contractor OHP (15%)
Total Direct Costs
Soft Costs
Engineering
Construction Management
Prestressed Concrete Tank and
Standard Appurtenances
(Includes Disinfection and
Hydrostatic Testing)
Subtotal Direct Costs
Contingency (30%)
Insurance and Bonds (2%)
Escalation/Market Uncertainty (3%)
Excavation (Cut and Fill)
Asphalt Paving
Subtotal Direct Costs
Major Equipment
Prestressed Concrete Tank and
Standard Appurtenances
(Includes Disinfection and
Hydrostatic Testing)
Aggregate Base Rock
Catch Basin and Site Drainage
Site Restoration
Piping and Appurtenances
Electrical and Appurtenances
Item Description
Site Work
Mobilization
SWPPP/Monitoring
Temporary Sheeting and
(EKI C40163.00) 6 of 9
EKI Environment & Water, Inc.
July 2026
351
Unit Qty. Unit Price Item Cost
LS 1 $500,000 $500,000
LS 1 $60,000 $60,000
LS 1 $80,000 $80,000
CY 600 $35 $21,000
LS 1 $100,000 $100,000
LS 1 $60,000 $60,000
LS 1 $200,000 $200,000
LS 1 $90,000 $90,000
Booster Pump Skid LS 1 $130,000 $130,000
LS 1 $78,000 $78,000
LS 1 $150,000 $150,000
CY 21525.6 $15 $322,883
SF 11500 $15 $172,500
$1,964,383
MG 1.5 $1,790,405 $1,790,405
MG 1.5 $1,790,405 $1,790,405
$3,580,810
$1,913,092
$127,539
$191,309
$831,779
$8,608,913
% 10 $860,891 $860,891
% 10 $860,891 $860,891
% 2 $172,178 $172,178
% 0.5 $43,045 $43,045
$1,937,006
$10,545,919
-30% $7,382,143
50% $15,818,878
Environmental and Permitting
Administration
Subtotal Soft Costs
Grand Total
Opinion of Probable Cost
Site #4: 1266 Beech Street (Future MLK Park), Steel Tanks Pump Station Building
Backup Generator
Contractor OHP (15%)
Total Direct Costs
Soft Costs
Engineering
Construction Management
Welded Steel Tank and
Standard Appurtenances
(Includes Coating, Cathodic
Protection, Disinfection, and
Hydrostatic Testing)
Subtotal Direct Costs
Contingency (30%)
Insurance and Bonds (2%)
Escalation/Market Uncertainty (3%)
Excavation (Cut and Fill)
Asphalt Paving
Subtotal Direct Costs
Major Equipment
Welded Steel Tank and
Standard Appurtenances
(Includes Coating, Cathodic
Protection, Disinfection, and
Hydrostatic Testing)
Aggregate Base Rock
Catch Basin and Site Drainage
Site Restoration
Piping and Appurtenances
Electrical and Appurtenances
Item Description
Site Work
Mobilization
SWPPP/Monitoring
Temporary Sheeting and
(EKI C40163.00) 7 of 9
EKI Environment & Water, Inc.
July 2026
352
Unit Qty. Unit Price Item Cost
LS 1 $500,000 $500,000
LS 1 $60,000 $60,000
LS 1 $80,000 $80,000
CY 600 $35 $21,000
LS 1 $100,000 $100,000
LS 1 $60,000 $60,000
LS 1 $200,000 $200,000
LS 1 $90,000 $90,000
Booster Pump Skid LS 1 $130,000 $130,000
LS 1 $78,000 $78,000
LS 1 $150,000 $150,000
CY 21525.6 $15 $322,883
SF 10160 $15 $152,400
$1,944,283
MG 1.6 $3,625,000 $3,625,000
MG 1.6 $3,625,000 $3,625,000
$7,250,000
$3,172,028
$211,469
$317,203
$1,379,143
$14,274,125
% 10 $1,427,412 $1,427,412
% 10 $1,427,412 $1,427,412
% 2 $285,482 $285,482
% 0.5 $71,371 $71,371
$3,211,678
$17,485,803
-30% $12,240,062
50% $26,228,705
Environmental and Permitting
Administration
Subtotal Soft Costs
Grand Total
Opinion of Probable Cost
Site #5: Future Athletic Field, Concrete Tanks
Pump Station Building
Backup Generator
Contractor OHP (15%)
Total Direct Costs
Soft Costs
Engineering
Construction Management
Prestressed Concrete Tank and
Standard Appurtenances
(Includes Disinfection and
Hydrostatic Testing)
Subtotal Direct Costs
Contingency (30%)
Insurance and Bonds (2%)
Escalation/Market Uncertainty (3%)
Excavation (Cut and Fill)
Asphalt Paving
Subtotal Direct Costs
Major Equipment
Prestressed Concrete Tank and
Standard Appurtenances
(Includes Disinfection and
Hydrostatic Testing)
Aggregate Base Rock
Catch Basin and Site Drainage
Site Restoration
Piping and Appurtenances
Electrical and Appurtenances
Item Description
Site Work
Mobilization
SWPPP/Monitoring
Temporary Sheeting and
(EKI C40163.00) 8 of 9
EKI Environment & Water, Inc.
July 2026
353
Unit Qty. Unit Price Item Cost
LS 1 $500,000 $500,000
LS 1 $60,000 $60,000
LS 1 $80,000 $80,000
CY 600 $35 $21,000
LS 1 $100,000 $100,000
LS 1 $60,000 $60,000
LS 1 $200,000 $200,000
LS 1 $90,000 $90,000
Booster Pump Skid LS 1 $130,000 $130,000
LS 1 $78,000 $78,000
LS 1 $150,000 $150,000
CY 21525.6 $15 $322,883
SF 10160 $15 $152,400
$1,944,283
MG 1.5 $1,790,405 $1,790,405
MG 1.5 $1,790,405 $1,790,405
$3,580,810
$1,906,157
$127,077
$190,616
$828,764
$8,577,708
% 10 $857,771 $857,771
% 10 $857,771 $857,771
% 2 $171,554 $171,554
% 0.5 $42,889 $42,889
$1,929,984
$10,507,693
-30% $7,355,385
50% $15,761,539
Environmental and Permitting
Administration
Subtotal Soft Costs
Grand Total
Opinion of Probable Cost
Site #5: Future Athletic Field, Steel Tanks
Pump Station Building
Backup Generator
Contractor OHP (15%)
Total Direct Costs
Soft Costs
Engineering
Construction Management
Welded Steel Tank and
Standard Appurtenances
(Includes Coating, Cathodic
Protection, Disinfection, and
Hydrostatic Testing)
Subtotal Direct Costs
Contingency (30%)
Insurance and Bonds (2%)
Escalation/Market Uncertainty (3%)
Excavation (Cut and Fill)
Asphalt Paving
Subtotal Direct Costs
Major Equipment
Welded Steel Tank and
Standard Appurtenances
(Includes Coating, Cathodic
Protection, Disinfection, and
Hydrostatic Testing)
Aggregate Base Rock
Catch Basin and Site Drainage
Site Restoration
Piping and Appurtenances
Electrical and Appurtenances
Item Description
Site Work
Mobilization
SWPPP/Monitoring
Temporary Sheeting and
(EKI C40163.00) 9 of 9
EKI Environment & Water, Inc.
July 2026
354
POLICY AND ACTION 9.2
EAST PALO ALTO
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
DATE: July 21, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Melvin E. Gaines, City Manager
BY: Batool Zaro, Senior Engineer
Humza Javed, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: University Avenue Grand Corridor Project Pilot Project Contract Amendment Recommendation
Adopt a resolution:
1. Authorizing the City Manager to execute the first contract amendment, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with CSWST2 for design services for the University Avenue Grand Corridor Project to increase the contract budget by $359,545 for a new not-to-exceed contract amount of $2,040,450; and
2. Finding that the action being considered does not constitute a “Project” within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to CEQA Guideline section 15378 (b)(5), in that it is a government administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect changes in the environment, and because environmental review of the project will be performed as part of this contract during the design phase.
Alignment with City Council Strategic Plan
This recommendation is primarily aligned with:
Priority: Public Health, Safety, and Quality of Life
Priority: Public Infrastructure and Utilities
Background
University Avenue is the primary transportation spine for drivers, bicyclists, and transit riders in 355
POLICY AND ACTION 9.2
the City of East Palo Alto. The corridor connects neighborhoods with cultural, recreational, and civic destinations and is lined with a diverse mix of land uses, including single- and multi-family residential neighborhoods, retail and commercial businesses, public and institutional uses, and undeveloped parcels with future development potential. University Avenue also functions as a regional cut-through route for traffic accessing the Dumbarton Bridge to the north and U.S.
Highway 101 to the south. At present, the city does not have an adopted corridor-specific plan for University Avenue.
In September 2023, the City of East Palo Alto Public Works Department applied for and was awarded Measure A/W funding through the San Mateo County Transportation Authority (SMCTA) for the University Avenue Grand Corridor Project. The project includes community engagement, planning, and conceptual design for the 1.2-mile segment of University Avenue extending from Donohoe Street to Kavanaugh Drive, entirely within the City’s jurisdiction.
The purpose of the project is to engage the community in developing a shared vision for the corridor and to advance design concepts that encourage walking, bicycling, transit use, carpooling, and shared-ride options; improve parking management; incorporate placemaking elements; and apply complete streets principles to create a safer, more efficient, and more welcoming corridor for all users and residents.
The City was awarded $1,050,000 of TA Measure W Highway Program funds with an additional requirement for a $1,000,000 City match. Per Resolution 93-2023, City Council supported the project and committed the $1,000,000 City match. This project is also budgeted in the adopted 10-year Capital Improvement Plan and is a City Council priority project.
On March 18, 2025, the City Council awarded the project to CSWST2 through Resolution No. 22-2025, with a total not to exceed amount of $1,680,905, and the project was initiated on October 1, 2025. A four-month community engagement process resulted in the development of a Corridor Vision informed by adopted City plans, existing conditions, and extensive community input.
On March 3, 2026, staff presented University Avenue Grand Corridor conceptual options to City Council for approval and feedback in order to proceed with advancing to the plans, specifications, and estimate (PS&E) phase of the project. Two options were presented to Council: Option A was focused on local mobility and included a road diet, or lane reduction between Bay Road and Donohoe Street. Option B focused on mobility and kept the existing lane configuration of two travel lanes. Although Council leaned towards Option B, they communicated interest in exploring a temporary pilot project to test out Option A.
Since the project is grant funded and the funding agreement requires that all project-related tasks be substantially complete by June 2026, staff reached out to the San Mateo County Transportation Authority to discuss the possibility of a project time extension. City staff requested a minor scope addition in order to implement the temporary pilot project as part of further engagement during the active planning and preliminary engineering phase of the project. The City will collect traffic counts, make qualitative observations, and collect community feedback on the pilot in to confirm overall direction to reduce the possibility of advancing a design that may 356
POLICY AND ACTION 9.2
not be fully supported.
Analysis
The proposed contract amendment expands the consultant's scope of work to design, implement, monitor, and evaluate a pilot project for the University Avenue Grand Corridor between Donohoe Street and Bay Road. The pilot project will temporarily reconfigure the corridor by reducing travel lanes from two lanes in each direction to one lane in each direction, incorporating dedicated emergency vehicle and transit lanes, and implementing signal timing improvements using quick-build materials. The pilot will allow the city to evaluate the operational, safety, and community impacts of the proposed corridor improvements before considering permanent implementation.
Additional services include project initiation and community engagement; baseline, mid-pilot, and post-pilot traffic data collection and analysis; preparation of pilot implementation plans, specifications, and cost estimates; CEQA documentation; bidding and installation support; ongoing traffic monitoring and operational adjustments during the pilot period; community outreach and public surveys throughout implementation; preparation of mid-pilot and final evaluation reports; and presentations to the City Council summarizing findings and recommendations.
The contract amendment authorizes additional consultant services necessary to implement and evaluate a University Avenue Grand Corridor Pilot Project.
Next Steps
A rough schedule for next steps is as follows:
Task Schedule
Council approval of the
amendment
July 2026
Pre- Pilot Project Scope July 2026 - September 2026
Pilot 100% design package/
Bidding & Installation
October 2026 – April 2027
Monitoring and Engagement May 2027- May 2028
Final Evaluation Report June 2028
Fiscal Impact
The proposed contract amendment will increase the project budget by $359,545. Staff recommends restoring an additional appropriation of $359,545 to the project budget, funded 357
POLICY AND ACTION 9.2
equally by the Measure W Highway Program grant ($179,772.50) and the required City matching funds ($179,772.50). This action restores the project budget to the original capital budget authorized by the City Council through Resolution No. 93-2023, which approved the project and committed the City's matching funds. As a result, this action does not increase the City's previously authorized financial commitment to the project.
Public Notice
The public was provided notice by making the agenda and report available on the City’s website and on a bulletin board located at City Hall: 2415 University Avenue, East Palo Alto.
Environmental
The action being considered does not constitute a “Project” within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to CEQA Guideline section 15378 (b)(5), in that it is a government administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect changes in the environment.
Environmental review of the project will be performed as part of this contract during the design phase.
Government Code § 84308
Applicability of Levine Act: No, as the proposed action was competitively bid.
Analysis of Levine Act Compliance: Not applicable.
Attachments
1. Resolution
2. Consultant’s Proposal
358
Resolution No. xx-2026 1 of 2
RESOLUTION NO. xx – 2026
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND EXECUTE THE FIRST CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH CSWST2, IN A FORM TO BE APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY, TO INCREASE THE CONTRACT AMOUNT BY $359,545 FOR A NEW NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $2,040,450 FOR DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE UNIVERSITY AVENUE GRAND CORRIDOR
PILOT PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of East Palo Alto’s major arterial, University Avenue, experiences traffic congestion, delay, localized air pollution, noise and vibration, and traffic injuries; and WHEREAS, The University Avenue Grand Corridor project (ST-29) includes planning and design of improvements along this busy corridor from Donohoe Street to the City’s northern limit; and WHEREAS, the San Mateo County Transportation Authority (TA) issued a Call for Projects for the Measure A and Measure W Highway Program funds on July 5, 2023; and WHEREAS, the City applied for the grant and was awarded $1,050,000 for the project with a required City match of $1,000,000; and
WHEREAS, on March 18, 2025, the City Council awarded the project to CSWST2 through Resolution No. 22-2025, with a total not to exceed amount of $1,680,905; and WHEREAS, on March 3, 2026, staff presented University Avenue Grand Corridor Concept Plans to City Council for approval and feedback in order to proceed with advancing to the plans, specifications, and estimate (PS&E) phase of the project; and WHEREAS, during the March 3, 2026, city council meeting, the council expressed interest in exploring a temporary pilot project reducing lanes along University Avenue; and WHEREAS, since the project grant funding requires that all project-related tasks be substantially complete by June 2026, staff received an extension from the San Mateo County Transportation Authority to implement a new pilot project; and
WHEREAS, the scope of the University Avenue Grand Corridor Project Pilot Project includes additional public engagement, traffic studies, implementation and evaluation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO HEREBY:
1. Finds the foregoing recitals are true and correct, and are incorporated by this reference into this action;
2. Authorizes the City Manager to execute the first contract amendment, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with CSWST2 for design services for the University Avenue Grand Corridor 359
Resolution No. xx-2026 2 of 2
Project to increase the contract budget by $359,545 for a new not-to-exceed contract amount of $2,040,450;
3. Finds that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Sections 15301 ,15303, and 15304 of the CEQA Guidelines.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of July 2026, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Webster Lincoln, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
James Colin, City Clerk John D. Lê, City Attorney
360
CSWST2.com
CSWST2 | 303 Twin Dolphin Drive Redwood Shores, 6th Floor, Redwood City, CA 94065 | t. 415.883.9850 June 16, 2026
Revised: June 26, 2026
Project Number: 2400169.01
Batool Zaro
Public Works Department
Engineering Division
City of East Palo Alto
160 Tate Street
East Palo Alto, CA 94303
SUBJECT: UNIVERSITY AVENUE GRAND CORRIDOR PROJECT – PILOT PROJECT Confirmation of Additional Services No. 2
Dear Batool:
CSWST2 is pleased to continue to support the City of East Palo Alto in development of the University Avenue Grand Corridor through the development of a pilot project. Enclosed is the Confirmation of Additional Services No. 2 (CAS2) to cover the services we are performing in connection with University Avenue Grand Corridor project located in East Palo Alto, California.
We understand the City Council has requested development of a pilot project between Donohoe Street and Bay Avenue to study the impacts of lane reduction on tra:ic flow. We recognize that this pilot project is not simply a striping exercise, but an opportunity to evaluate how the corridor can better serve all users while supporting the broader goals of safety, accessibility, economic vitality, and community identity. Our approach prioritizes collaboration with City sta:, stakeholders, residents, businesses, emergency responders, transit agencies, and corridor users throughout the planning and implementation process. We also understand the importance of collecting meaningful public input and operational data to support informed decision-making regarding potential permanent improvements.
A key component of our proposed approach is the integration of intercept surveys and ongoing community engagement throughout the pilot period. We believe that successful quick-build projects rely on both technical analysis and lived community experience. Our team will conduct intercept surveys before and during the pilot project to better understand corridor user perceptions, travel behavior, safety concerns, and community priorities. These e:orts, combined with quantitative monitoring of speeds, tra:ic operations, and multimodal activity, will provide the City with a comprehensive understanding of pilot performance.
We understand the intent of the project is to replicate the proposed University Avenue Grand Corridor geometry as shown in Figure 1 below. The pilot project includes the following elements:
• Reduction of travel lanes from two to one travel lane in each direction • Dedicated emergency vehicle and bus lanes
• Signal timing improvements
361