Agenda packet — Portola Valley City Council, January 10, 2024 (part 2 of 2)

Laura Russel, Director

Page 2 ends

Public participation in the development, adoption and implementation of the housing element is essential to effective housing planning. Throughout the housing element process, the Town should continue to engage the community, including organizations that represent lower-income and special needs households, by making information regularly available and considering and incorporating comments where appropriate.

Please be aware, any revisions to the element must be posted on the local government’s website and to email a link to all individuals and organizations that have previously requested notices relating to the local government’s housing element at least seven days before submitting to HCD.

Several federal, state, and regional funding programs consider housing element compliance as an eligibility or ranking criteria. For example, the CalTrans Senate Bill (SB) 1 Sustainable Communities grant, the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities programs, and HCD’s Permanent Local Housing Allocation consider housing element compliance and/or annual reporting requirements pursuant to Government Code section 65400. With a compliant housing element, the Town will meet housing element requirements for these and other funding sources.

For your information, some general plan element updates are triggered by housing element adoption. HCD reminds the Town to consider timing provisions and welcomes the opportunity to provide assistance. For information, please see the Technical Advisories issued by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research at:
https://www.opr.ca.gov/planning/general-plan/guidelines.html.

We are committed to assisting the Town in addressing all statutory requirements of State Housing Element Law. If you have any questions or need additional technical assistance, please contact Sohab Mehmood, of our staff, at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Paul McDougall
Senior Program Manager
Enclosure
ATTACHMENT 5 Page 195 of 285
Town of Portola Valley’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Adopted Housing Element Page 1 July 25, 2023

APPENDIX

TOWN OF PORTOLA VALLEY
The following changes are necessary to bring the Town’s housing element into compliance with Article 10.6 of the Government Code. Accompanying each recommended change, we cite the supporting section of the Government Code.

Housing element technical assistance information is available on HCD’s website at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning-and-community-development/hcd-memos. Among other resources, the housing element section contains HCD’s latest technical assistance tool, Building Blocks for Effective Housing Elements (Building Blocks), available at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning-and-community-development/housing-elements/buildingblocks and includes the Government Code addressing State Housing Element Law and other resources.

A. Housing Needs, Resources, and Constraints

1. Affirmatively further[ing] fair housing in accordance with Chapter 15 (commencing with Section 8899.50) of Division 1 of Title 2…shall include an assessment of fair housing in the jurisdiction. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(10)(A).) Income and Racial Concentration of Affluence (RCAA): While the element was revised to include some analysis on income and RCAA, the analysis must still address trends, conditions, coincidence with other fair housing factors (e.g., race, highest resource, overpayment), effectiveness or absence of past strategies (e.g., lack of publicly assisted housing and lack of multifamily zoning), local data and knowledge and other relevant factors.

2. Analyze any special housing needs such as elderly; persons with disabilities, including a developmental disability; large families; farmworkers; families with female heads of households; and families and persons in need of emergency shelter. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(7).)
While the element was revised to now quantify the number of seniors and large households, as found in HCD's prior review, it still needs to include a complete analysis of special needs populations. Specifically, a complete analysis of each population group should discuss challenges faced by the population, the existing resources to meet those needs (availability senior housing units, number of large units, number of deed restricted units, etc.,), an assessment of any gaps in resources, and proposed policies, programs, and funding to help address those gaps.

3. An inventory of land suitable and available for residential development, including vacant sites and sites having realistic and demonstrated potential for redevelopment during the planning period to meet the locality’s housing need for a designated income level, and ATTACHMENT 5 Page 196 of 285
Town of Portola Valley’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Adopted Housing Element Page 2 July 25, 2023
an analysis of the relationship of zoning and public facilities and services to these sites. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(3).)
Progress in Meeting the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA): As you know, the Town’s RHNA may be reduced by the number of new units built since July 1, 2022, however the element must demonstrate their availability in the planning period. The element indicates 52 units including 17 lower-income units as credit towards the RHNA through the Willow Commons and Sanford Wedge projects.

HCD's prior review found that the element must demonstrate the availability of these units during the planning period. The element was revised to briefly describe the status for one of these projects indicating that an environmental impact report (EIR) has been made available to the public. However, this still does not demonstrate the likelihood that these units will be built during the planning period. To address this requirement, the element could discuss project status, schedule for completion, outreach with developments, remaining steps for projects to receive final entitlements and any other relevant information that demonstrates the availability of these units during the planning period.

Opt-In-Single-Family Rezoning Program: In order to accommodate the remaining need for the above moderate-income RHNA, the Town is proposing to develop a program where property owners can opt-in to rezone their parcel to allow for four units per acre and a maximum of four dwelling units per lot. The Town is expecting to increase capacity by twelve units. HCD’s prior review found that the element must include an analysis of any program guidelines and processes, description of existing uses, sample parcel inventory, criteria to identify parcels, and interest from property owners and stronger programs to monitor and incentivize development. The element still should be revised, as follows:
• Development Cap – The element was revised to indicate that while 134 parcels are eligible for this program, the Town will be capping this program at 12 units during the planning period. Additionally, any approved SB9 units will count towards this cap. Please note that this cap is potentially considered a constraint on providing housing capacity, can limit the jurisdictions’ ability to promote housing mobility and is in potential conflict with SB 330 (Housing Crisis Act).

Specifically, The Housing Crisis Act of 2019 was signed by Governor Newsom on October 9, 2019 and became effective on January 1, 2020. The Housing Crisis Act (Gov. Code, § 66300) generally prohibits, among other items, a locality from enacting limits on approvals or caps population.
• Approval Process – The revised analysis indicates that the approval process will be capped at three public meetings and will require planning commission review.

The element should include additional information and analyze the approval process. Specifically, it should discuss the type of required permits needed to approve projects under this program (e.g., zoning text amendments, administrative permit). Additionally, it should analyze this process and its ATTACHMENT 5 Page 197 of 285
Town of Portola Valley’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Adopted Housing Element Page 3 July 25, 2023
interaction with SB 9. For example, while the Town is requiring planning commission hearings and possible other discretionary permits, SB 9 accomplishes a similar outcome and provides a ministerial process. The analysis should consider how this program incentivizes additional housing units beyond existing laws. As found in HCD’s prior review, the element must include a parcel inventory to demonstrate the type of parcels that may be eligible for this program.

Lastly, please be aware, pursuant to Government Code section 65583 (c)(1)(A), rezones to accommodate RHNA must occur within three years from date of adoption of the element. The element should include a program to monitor application of the program to ensure that rezonings have been completed within that timeframe and commit to rezone or amend the housing element to identify additional sites.
• Programs – The element should include programs committing to provide incentives to property owners, monitoring production and the effectiveness of this program and implementing additional actions or strategies if assumptions do not actualize during the planning period. Lastly, the element could consider stronger actions to incentivize affordable units to address affirmatively furthering fair housing (AFFH) and promote housing mobility.

Availability of Zoning: The element identified several sites that did not have appropriate zoning or densities to accommodate the RHNA. As such, the element shows a shortfall of sites to accommodate the RHNA; 106 units including 64 units for lower-income households. While the element has included programs committing to rezoning sites with the Town’s new multifamily land use designations, because zoning was not in place at the start of the planning period (January 31, 2023), the element must include a program committing to housing element rezone requirements pursuant to Government Code section 65583.2 (h) and (i). As part of these rezoning requirements, the element must commit to establishing a minimum density of 20 units per acre (GC 65583.2 (h)).

HCD’s prior review found that the element should clarify if the minimum density for the rezone is also the maximum density. The element was revised to indicate that the minimum density for the rezones will be three units per acre and the maximum density will be 20 units per acre. However, because the Town needs to comply with Government Code section 65583.2 (h) and (i), the minimum density for rezoning to accommodate the lower-income RHNA must be 20 units per acre. Additionally, to encourage and facilitate for a variety of housing types and not constrain multifamily development, the Town’s rezone strategy should provide for a range of densities (e.g., 20 to 30 units per acre).

4. An analysis of potential and actual governmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels, including the types of housing identified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (c), and for persons with disabilities as identified in the analysis pursuant to paragraph (7), including land use controls, building codes and their enforcement, site improvements, fees and other exactions required of developers, and local processing and permit procedures... (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(5).)
ATTACHMENT 5 Page 198 of 285
Town of Portola Valley’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Adopted Housing Element Page 4 July 25, 2023
Local Processing and Permit Procedures:
• Architectural and Site Control Commission (ASCC) – HCD's prior review found that the element must describe the design criteria, approval procedures, and decision-making criteria for the ASCC. The element was revised to indicate that multifamily housing with lower-income units will not be subjected to this process and market rate multifamily will only be subject to discretionary review design review. However, as noted in HCD's prior review, the element still needs to identify any decision-marking criteria (e.g., approval findings) and analyze these requirements for impacts on timing, feasibility, and approval certainty. Based on a complete analysis, the element may need to add or modify programs to address this constraint.
• Affiliated Housing Program – The element was revised to indicate that this program has been typically implemented through the housing element and the conditional use permit (CUP) findings are generally related to site suitability, safety, and harmony. However, as found in HCD's prior review, the element still must identify and analyze the complete approval process. For example, the element should discuss how projects proposed under this program are approved including typical development standards, specific findings, and approval criteria for the CUP, standards that are required to opt-in to the program, and other requirements that impact the feasibility of development on these sites. • Local Processing and Permit Procedures – The element should address public comments on this revised draft submittal and discuss compliance with the Permit Streamlining Act and intersections with CEQA and timing requirements, including streamlining determinations and add or modify programs as appropriate.

Zoning, Development Standards and Fees: The element was not revised to address this requirement. The element must clarify compliance with new transparency requirements for posting all zoning, development standards and fees on the Town’s website and add a program to address these requirements, if necessary.

Constraints on Housing for Persons with Disabilities:
• Reasonable Accommodation – The element was revised to indicate that it needs to update the Town definition of family as part of the reasonable accommodation procedure. However, as found in HCD’s prior review, the element must describe the process and decision-making criteria such as approval findings and analyze any potential constraints on housing for persons with disabilities. • Group Homes of Seven or More Persons - The element was revised to include Program 8-10 committing to allowing these uses with a conditional use permit and objective standards. However, the element should clarify if these uses are ATTACHMENT 5 Page 199 of 285
Town of Portola Valley’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Adopted Housing Element Page 5 July 25, 2023
only subject to those restrictions that apply to similar residential uses. Based on a complete analysis, the element may need to modify programs to address any constraints.

5. An analysis of potential and actual nongovernmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels, including… …requests to develop housing at densities below those anticipated in the analysis required by subdivision (c) of Government Code section 65583.2, and the length of time between receiving approval for a housing development and submittal of an application for building permits for that housing development that hinder the construction of a locality’s share of the regional housing need in accordance with Government Code section 65584... (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(6).)
Developed Densities and Permit Times: The element was not revised to address this requirement. As found in HCD's prior review, the element must be revised to include analysis of requests to develop housing at densities below those anticipated, and the length of time between receiving approval for a housing development and submittal of an application for building permits that potentially hinder the construction of a locality’s share of the regional housing need.

B. Housing Programs

1. Identify actions that will be taken to make sites available during the planning period with appropriate zoning and development standards and with services and facilities to accommodate that portion of the city’s or county’s share of the regional housing need for each income level that could not be accommodated on sites identified in the inventory completed pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) without rezoning, and to comply with the requirements of Government Code section 65584.09. Sites shall be identified as needed to facilitate and encourage the development of a variety of types of housing for all income levels, including multifamily rental housing, factory-built housing, mobilehomes, housing for agricultural employees, supportive housing, single-room occupancy units, emergency shelters, and transitional housing. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(1).)
As noted in Finding A3, the element does not include a complete site analysis; therefore, the adequacy of sites and zoning were not established. Based on the results of a complete sites inventory and analysis, the Town may need to add or revise programs to address a shortfall of sites or zoning available to encourage a variety of housing types. In addition, the element should be revised as follows:

Shortfall of Sites: – As noted above because zoning was not in place at the start of the planning period, the Town is showing a shortfall of 106 units including 64 units for lowerincome households.

ATTACHMENT 5 Page 200 of 285
Town of Portola Valley’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Adopted Housing Element Page 6 July 25, 2023
While the element included Programs 1-1 and 1-2 committing to rezoning to allow residential uses at appropriate densities to accommodate the RHNA, programs to address the lower-income RHNA must specifically commit to rezoning pursuant to Government Code section 65583.2, subdivisions (h) and (i). Examples of requirements include permitting, without discretionary action, multifamily developments in which 20 percent or more of the units are affordable to lower-income households, requiring minimum densities and residential performance standards.

Additionally, since the Town failed to adopt a compliant housing element within 120 days of the statutory deadline (January 31, 2023), rezones to accommodate the RHNA must be completed no later than one year from the statutory deadline.

Programs 7-1 through 7-8: Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU): – The element was revised to strengthen several programs under Policy 7 – Promote ADUs. The element included actions to monitor ADU production and if assumptions are not met, initiate additional actions including expedited plan check and waiving fees. However, given the Town’s reliance on ADUs and as found in HCD’s prior review, the element must include a commitment to adjusting projected assumptions if the number of units and affordability do not actualize during the planning period. Specifically, the degree of additional actions should be in stride with the degree of the gap in production and affordability. For example, if actual production and affordability of ADUs is far from anticipated trends, then the element must commit to amending the housing element, identifying additional sites, and rezoning within a timely manner (e.g., within six months).

Program 8-3: Emergency Shelters: – This Program includes a commitment to amend the zoning code to require on-site parking for all staff working in an emergency shelter.

However, this Program should include a specific commitment to comply with AB139/Government Code section 65583, subdivision (a)(4)(A) which requires that parking for emergency shelters should only be the number of spaces necessary for staff working in the shelter and no more than other uses in the same zones.

Programs 1-4, 3-2 and 4-2: Affiliated Housing Sites: – The element identifies two sites that will not be rezoned but are anticipated to be developed under the Affiliated Housing Site Program including the 42 Acre Sequoia Housing Site and the Christ Church Affiliated Housing site. As found in HCD’s prior review, the element must include programs that commit to facilitating the development of these properties and commit to monitor production throughout the planning period and if necessary additional actions to identify additional capacity. While the element committed to establishing development standards; providing flexibility to those standards; conducting outreach and promoting technical assistance; the element still needs to include programs committing to monitoring the effectiveness of these efforts and stronger incentives to promote affordability.

Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space Housing Site: – This site is an integral part of the addressing the Town’s lower-income RHNA. Specifically, this site is accommodating roughly half of the Town’s lower-income RHNA. Additionally, this site is owned by the ATTACHMENT 5 Page 201 of 285
Town of Portola Valley’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Adopted Housing Element Page 7 July 25, 2023
Town, therefore providing the Town a unique opportunity to provide much needed affordable housing. As such, the element needs to include significant actions to facilitate and encourage development on this site. The element should include a program with numerical objectives that ensures compliance with the Surplus Land Act, provides incentives and actions along with a schedule to facilitate development of this site.

Actions should include outreach with developers, issuing requests for proposals, incentives, fee waivers, priority processing and financial assistance.

2. The Housing Element shall contain programs which assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of extremely low-, very low-, low- and moderateincome households. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(2).) The element indicated that the Town will require set aside units for extremely low income (ELI) households within the Dorothy Ford Site. However, the element must include specific actions to meaningfully address ELI households. As found in HCD's prior review, program actions could include prioritizing some funding for housing developments affordable to ELI households and offering financial incentives or regulatory concessions to encourage the development of housing types, such as multifamily, single-room occupancy (SRO) units, to address the identified housing needs for ELI households. For additional information, see the Building Blocks at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/extremely-low-income-housing-needs.

3. Address and, where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental and nongovernmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing, including housing for all income levels and housing for persons with disabilities. The program shall remove constraints to, and provide reasonable accommodations for housing designed for, intended for occupancy by, or with supportive services for, persons with disabilities. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(3).) As noted in Finding(s) A4 and A5, the element requires a complete analysis of potential governmental and nongovernmental constraints. Depending upon the results of that analysis, the Town may need to revise or add programs and address and remove or mitigate any identified constraints.

In addition, while Program 4-1 (Parking Requirements) was revised with an updated program timeline, as found in HCD's prior review, this Program should be revised to include specific details regarding the new parking requirements for affordable housing.

4. The Housing Element shall include programs to conserve and improve the condition of the existing affordable housing stock. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(4).) HCD’s prior review found that the element must include programs to conserve and improve the condition of the housing stock. The element was revised to reference the Town’s ADU programs and indicated that the Town does not have a need for programs related to these issues. However, the housing needs assessment indicated that approximately ten units may require rehabilitation, but owners lack the discretionary ATTACHMENT 5 Page 202 of 285
Town of Portola Valley’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Adopted Housing Element Page 8 July 25, 2023
income to fund these improvements. As found in HCD’s prior review, the element still should include programs to conserve and improve the housing stock. Strategies could include providing grants for substantial rehabilitation, provide matching grants for homeowner improvements, or implement proactive code enforcement program with resources.

5. Promote and affirmatively further fair housing opportunities and promote housing throughout the community or communities for all persons regardless of race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status, or disability, and other characteristics... (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(5).)
Goals, Priorities, Metrics, and Milestones: – While the element was revised to indicate that the Town’s fair housing actions include programs related to ADU, inclusionary housing and other efforts related to the RHNA, this generally does not address HCD’s prior review.

The assessment of fair housing demonstrated that that the Town along with its neighbors is entirely highest resourced, highest income, and wholly a RCAA, a stark contrast to the rest of the region. Additionally, the element identified majority of its RHNA at the edges of the Town. These conditions and circumstances warrant significant and robust actions (not limited to the RHNA) to promote housing mobility and increasing housing choices and affordability throughout and beyond the Town, including in lower-density neighborhoods. The element should be revised with aggressively numeric targets and geographic targets throughout the Town, including lower-density neighborhoods. Examples include creating more housing choices and affordability in single-family neighborhoods beyond complying with law (e.g., SB 9, ADUs), targeting affordable housing funding, homesharing programs, more than one junior accessory dwelling unit (per single family structure, enhancing capacity, affordability, and housing choices on religious institutional sites beyond the RHNA and other alternative land use strategies. Lastly, the element must be revised to include quantified metrics (beyond the RHNA) programs focused on housing mobility and increased housing opportunities and affordability.

ATTACHMENT 5 Page 203 of 285
HCD COMMENTS ON DRAFT PORTOLA VALLEY ADOPTED HOUSING ELEMENT (DATED 7/25/23) (Changes to Programs shown in double underline and strikethrough text) 1 Comment
Number Comment Town Response
A1 A. Housing Needs, Resources, and Constraints

Appendix C, Assessment of Fair Housing was updated with the following information:
 A “Zoning and Land Use Patterns” section with local data and knowledge highlighting the Town’s lack of multifamily zoning which has largely contributed to low-density housing, higher median incomes and home values, and limited racial and ethnic diversity.

A2 2. Analyze any special housing needs such as elderly; persons with disabilities, including a developmental disability; large families; farmworkers; families with female heads of households; and families and persons in need of emergency shelter. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(7).)
While the element was revised to now quantify the number of seniors and large households, as found in HCD's prior review, it still needs to include a complete analysis of special needs populations. Specifically, a complete analysis of each population group should discuss challenges faced by the population, the existing resources to meet those needs (availability senior housing units, number of large units, number of deed restricted units, etc.,), an assessment of any gaps in resources, and proposed policies, programs, and funding to help address those gaps.

Section 2, Housing Needs was updated with the availability of senior housing, number of large units, and the lack of deed restricted units. References were added to programs in the Housing Element that will address gaps in resources for special needs populations.

A3.1 3. An inventory of land suitable and available for residential development, including vacant sites and sites having realistic and demonstrated potential for redevelopment during the planning period to meet the locality’s housing need for a designated income level, and an analysis of the relationship of zoning and public facilities and services to these sites. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(3).) Progress in Meeting the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA): As you know, the Town’s RHNA may be reduced by the number of new units built since July 1, 2022, however the element must demonstrate their availability in the planning period. The element indicates 52 units including 17 lower-income units as credit towards the RHNA through the Willow Commons and Stanford Wedge projects.

To address this requirement, the element could discuss project status, schedule for completion, outreach with developments, remaining steps for projects to receive final entitlements and any other relevant information that demonstrates the availability of these units during the planning period.

Additional information about the project status for both Willow Commons and Stanford Wedge was added to Section 6, Adequate Sites. To address HCD’s concern about the likeness of the availability of these units during the planning period, Program 5-3 was added to further the Town’s commitment to these projects getting built during the planning period.

Program 5-3: Facilitate and support pipeline projects during the planning period by working with applicants to ensure reviews are done in a timely manner and technical assistance is provided as needed and public meetings limitations are followed, as required by SB 330. And as needed, provide incentives or additional assistance like expediting project review, supporting funding applications, and working to avoid unnecessary delays in processing of the applications.

Quantified Objective/Metric: 50 units constructed by end of planning period.

Geographic Targeting: Stanford Wedge Pending Project and Willow Commons Approved Project
Project Time Frame: 50 units constructed by January 2031 Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund
A3.2 Opt-In-Single-Family Rezoning Program: In order to accommodate the remaining need for the above moderate-income RHNA, the Town is proposing to develop a program where property owners can opt-in to rezone their parcel to allow for four units per acre and a maximum of four dwelling units per lot. The Town is expecting to increase capacity by twelve units. HCD’s prior review found that the element must include an analysis of any program guidelines and processes, description of existing uses, sample parcel inventory, criteria to identify parcels, and interest from property owners and stronger programs to monitor and incentivize development. The element still should be revised, as follows:
 Development Cap – The element was revised to indicate that while 134 parcels are eligible for this program, the Town will be capping this program at 12 units during the planning period. Additionally, any approved SB9 units will count towards this cap. Please note that this cap is potentially considered a constraint on providing housing capacity, can limit the jurisdictions’ ability to promote housing mobility and is in potential conflict with SB 330 (Housing Crisis Act). Specifically, The Housing Crisis Act of 2019 was signed by Governor Newsom on October 9, 2019 and became effective on January 1, 2020. The Housing Crisis Act (Gov. Code, § 66300) generally prohibits, among other items, a locality from enacting limits on approvals or caps population.  Approval Process – The revised analysis indicates that the approval process will be capped at three public meetings and will require planning commission review. The element should include additional information and analyze the approval process. Specifically, it should discuss the type of required permits needed to approve projects under this program (e.g., zoning text amendments, administrative permit). Additionally, it should analyze this process and its interaction with SB 9. For example, while the Town is requiring planning commission hearings and possible other discretionary permits, SB 9 accomplishes a similar outcome and provides Program 1.3 was modified to be a Pilot Program and strengthened the monitoring for production and effectiveness. Furthermore, the Opt-in Rezoning Program is no longer part of the Sites Inventory. (These units were offset by adding 10 above moderate income ADUs to the Sites Inventory). As such, this program now only addresses AFFH goals to encourage greater housing mobility in lower density neighborhoods.

Program 1-3: Create a new Opt-In Housing Diversification Pilot Program that allows property owners with sites one acre or greater to develop up to 4 dwelling units per acre, with a maximum of 4 dwelling units per lot, if they meet the following safety criteria:
 Accessible to two ways of ingress and egress,
 Located on a slope less than 30%,
 Outside of a very high fire hazard severity zone,
 Outside of a fault zone, and
 Outside of areas identified with unstable soils or at risk of landslide or liquefaction.

Interested property owners would respond to a call for projects and go before Planning Commission to demonstrate all safety criteria would be met. Subsequently, the Architectural Site Control Commission (ASCC) would review the planning application for

EXHIBIT B
ATTACHMENT 5 Page 204 of 285
HCD COMMENTS ON DRAFT PORTOLA VALLEY ADOPTED HOUSING ELEMENT (DATED 7/25/23) (Changes to Programs shown in double underline and strikethrough text) 2 Comment
Number Comment Town Response
a ministerial process. The analysis should consider how this program incentivizes additional housing units beyond existing laws. As found in HCD’s prior review, the element must include a parcel inventory to demonstrate the type of parcels that may be eligible for this program. Lastly, please be aware, pursuant to Government Code section 65583 (c)(1)(A), rezones to accommodate RHNA must occur within three years from date of adoption of the element. The element should include a program to monitor application of the program to ensure that rezonings have been completed within that timeframe and commit to rezone or amend the housing element to identify additional sites.
 Programs – The element should include programs committing to provide incentives to property owners, monitoring production and the effectiveness of this program and implementing additional actions or strategies if assumptions do not actualize during the planning period. Lastly, the element could consider stronger actions to incentivize affordable units to address affirmatively furthering fair housing (AFFH) and promote housing mobility.
compliance with a set of objective design standards. The Town will evaluate the effectiveness of this program by mid-cycle, including making modifications to encourage the units, and whether the program has achieved or is making progress towards supporting construction of 12 above moderate units to address AFFH goals. If this program is successful in achieving this goal of 12 units by 2031, the Town could discontinue unless otherwise directed by Town Council.

Quantified Objective/Metric: Develop objective design standards and issue call for projects to support construction of 12 above-moderate units.

Geographic Targeting: Low-density neighborhoods
Time Frame: Develop objective standards by June 2025. Issue calls for projects in September 2025. Evaluate program effectiveness by December 2027.

Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council Financing Source: General Fund
A3.3 Availability of Zoning: The element identified several sites that did not have appropriate zoning or densities to accommodate the RHNA.

As such, the element shows a shortfall of sites to accommodate the RHNA; 106 units including 64 units for lower-income households.

While the element has included programs committing to rezoning sites with the Town’s new multifamily land use designations, because zoning was not in place at the start of the planning period (January 31, 2023), the element must include a program committing to housing element rezone requirements pursuant to Government Code section 65583.2 (h) and (i). As part of these rezoning requirements, the element must commit to establishing a minimum density of 20 units per acre (GC 65583.2 (h)).

The new multifamily zoning district was revised to require a minimum 20 units per acre and a maximum of 23 dwelling units per acre as shown in Program 1-1b (see also Rezoning Program subsection in Section 6, Adequate Sites).

A4.1 4. An analysis of potential and actual governmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels, including the types of housing identified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (c), and for persons with disabilities as identified in the analysis pursuant to paragraph (7), including land use controls, building codes and their enforcement, site improvements, fees and other exactions required of developers, and local processing and permit procedures... (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(5).) Local Processing and Permit Procedures:
 Architectural and Site Control Commission (ASCC) – HCD's prior review found that the element must describe the design criteria, approval procedures, and decision-making criteria for the ASCC. The element was revised to indicate that multifamily housing with lower-income units will not be subjected to this process and market rate multifamily will only be subject to discretionary review design review. However, as noted in HCD's prior review, the element still needs to identify any decision-marking criteria (e.g., approval findings) and analyze these requirements for impacts on timing, feasibility, and approval certainty. Based on a complete analysis, the element may need to add or modify programs to address this constraint.  Affiliated Housing Program – The element was revised to indicate that this program has been typically implemented through the housing element and the conditional use permit (CUP) findings are generally related to site suitability, safety, and harmony. However, as found in HCD's prior review, the element still must identify and analyze the complete approval process. For example, the element should discuss how projects proposed under this program are approved including typical development standards, specific findings, and approval criteria for the CUP, standards that are required to opt-in to the program, and other requirements that impact the feasibility of development on these sites.
 Local Processing and Permit Procedures – The element should address public comments on this revised draft submittal and discuss compliance with the Permit Streamlining Act and intersections with CEQA and timing requirements, including streamlining determinations and add or modify programs as appropriate.

Architectural and Site Control Commission (ASCC): The Town has an existing Program 1-1c to create Objective Design Standards and the ASCC will need to use them for decision-making criteria. Text was added to the ASCC Review Process in Section 4, Constraints clarifying the ASCC will review multifamily developments to determine if they are consistent with Objective Design Standards. Program 1-1c was also modified to reference Objective Design Standards will be used for the Affiliated Housing Program to demonstrate greater approval certainty:

Program 1-1c: Create Objective Design Standards for the new multi-family zoning districts to regulate building form and architectural details to create greater certainty in the design review process. This program helps to address fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of zoning for anything other than single family homes. As part of developing ODS, these standards will be used for the Affiliated Housing program (among others) and the Town will ensure they promote certainty and objectivity, and be limited to health, safety, and objective design standards.

Affiliated Housing Program: Section 5, Resources was modified to include new objective findings for the Affiliated Housing Program:

1. The project complies with the requirements of the objective design standards and any other applicable objective standard established with adopted Town plans and documents;

2. There are adequate infrastructure and public services available to serve the proposed development, including sewerage, water, fire and police protection, storm drainage facilities, and legal access to the lot;

3. The proposed development is on a legally created lot; and ATTACHMENT 5 Page 205 of 285
HCD COMMENTS ON DRAFT PORTOLA VALLEY ADOPTED HOUSING ELEMENT (DATED 7/25/23) (Changes to Programs shown in double underline and strikethrough text) 3 Comment
Number Comment Town Response

4. The project complies with mitigation measures of any applicable environmental document.

Local Processing and Permit Procedures: Section 4, Constraints, was updated with information about the Town’s environmental review process and a new Program 5-4 was added to ensure continued compliance with timeframes of CEQA and the Permit Streamlining Act:

Program 5-4: The Town shall initiate a standard operating procedure wherein the Planning & Building Director determines if a project is exempt from CEQA within 30 days after deeming a development application complete. The 30-day timeframe is required by Public Resources Code 21080.2. In the event a project is found to be exempt from CEQA, then provisions of the Permit Streamlining Act shall apply, and the application shall be processed within 60 days (Gov. Code 65950(a)(5)).

Quantified Objective/Metric: Continue to track project processing to ensure that an environmental determination is made pursuant to Public Resources Code 21080.1, within the timeframes of the Public Resources Code 21080.2 and Gov. Code 65950(a)(5) (e.g., State law).

Time Frame: Ongoing
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund
A4.2 Zoning, Development Standards and Fees: The element was not revised to address this requirement. The element must clarify compliance with new transparency requirements for posting all zoning, development standards and fees on the Town’s website and add a program to address these requirements, if necessary.

The Town’s website will be updated to satisfy new transparency requirements prior to Housing Element certification.

A4.3 Constraints on Housing for Persons with Disabilities:
 Reasonable Accommodation – The element was revised to indicate that it needs to update the Town definition of family as part of the reasonable accommodation procedure. However, as found in HCD’s prior review, the element must describe the process and decision-making criteria such as approval findings and analyze any potential constraints on housing for persons with disabilities.  Group Homes of Seven or More Persons - The element was revised to include Program 8-10 committing to allowing these uses with a conditional use permit and objective standards. However, the element should clarify if these uses are only subject to those restrictions that apply to similar residential uses. Based on a complete analysis, the element may need to modify programs to address any constraints.

Reasonable Accommodation: Historically the Town has approved reasonable accommodation requests at a staff level and no requests have been denied. The approval findings and more information about the process was added to Section 5, Resources.

Program 8-1 was also modified as follows:

Program 8-1: To comply with State law (SB 520), the Town adopted written Reasonable Accommodation Procedures within Chapter 18.11 of the Town’s Code of Ordinances.

The Town will review approval findings for objectivity and make any necessary revisions with other zoning code amendments and rezonings in March 2024. The Town will continue to analyze existing land use controls, building codes, and permit and processing procedures to determine constraints they impose on the development, maintenance, and improvement of housing for persons with disabilities. The Town hands out informational brochures and includes information on the Towns website to inform residents of the Reasonable Accommodation Procedures.

Group Homes of Seven or More Persons: Program 8-10 was modified to clarify these uses are only subject to objective findings in single-family zones.

A5 5. An analysis of potential and actual nongovernmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels, including… …requests to develop housing at densities below those anticipated in the analysis required by subdivision (c) of Government Code section 65583.2, and the length of time between receiving approval for a housing development and submittal of an application for building permits for that housing development that hinder the construction of a locality’s share of the regional housing need in accordance with Government Code section 65584... (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(6).) Developed Densities and Permit Times: The element was not revised to address this requirement. As found in HCD's prior review, the element must be revised to include analysis of requests to develop housing at densities below those anticipated, and the length of time between receiving approval for a housing development and submittal of an application for building permits that potentially hinder the construction of a locality’s share of the regional housing need.

As described in Section 4, Constraints, the length of time between application approval and building permit is 31-43 days. Furthermore, the Town has no history of multi-family projects except those under the Affiliated Housing Program (which has no minimum density), so the density is determined by what is requested.

ATTACHMENT 5 Page 206 of 285
HCD COMMENTS ON DRAFT PORTOLA VALLEY ADOPTED HOUSING ELEMENT (DATED 7/25/23) (Changes to Programs shown in double underline and strikethrough text) 4 Comment
Number Comment Town Response
B1.1 B. Housing Programs

1. Identify actions that will be taken to make sites available during the planning period with appropriate zoning and development standards and with services and facilities to accommodate that portion of the city’s or county’s share of the regional housing need for each income level that could not be accommodated on sites identified in the inventory completed pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) without rezoning, and to comply with the requirements of Government Code section 65584.09. Sites shall be identified as needed to facilitate and encourage the development of a variety of types of housing for all income levels, including multifamily rental housing, factory-built housing, mobilehomes, housing for agricultural employees, supportive housing, single-room occupancy units, emergency shelters, and transitional housing. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(1).) As noted in Finding A3, the element does not include a complete site analysis; therefore, the adequacy of sites and zoning were not established. Based on the results of a complete sites inventory and analysis, the Town may need to add or revise programs to address a shortfall of sites or zoning available to encourage a variety of housing types. In addition, the element should be revised as follows:

Shortfall of Sites: – As noted above because zoning was not in place at the start of the planning period, the Town is showing a shortfall of 106 units including 64 units for lower-income households.

While the element included Programs 1-1 and 1-2 committing to rezoning to allow residential uses at appropriate densities to accommodate the RHNA, programs to address the lower-income RHNA must specifically commit to rezoning pursuant to Government Code section 65583.2, subdivisions (h) and (i). Examples of requirements include permitting, without discretionary action, multifamily developments in which 20 percent or more of the units are affordable to lower-income households, requiring minimum densities and residential performance standards.

Noted, we now have sites zoned at 20 du/ac minimum and understand the deadline is to complete rezonings prior to mid-2024. In addition, Program 1-7 was added to address the lower-income RHNA and specifically commit to rezoning:

Program 1-7: Rezone sites as identified within Section 6, Adequate Sites to accommodate 272 residential units, representing the Town’s RHNA of 253 units and an 8 percent buffer to allow for compliance with No Net Loss Provisions of SB 166. The rezonings will support housing development at the following income levels:
 VLI: 86
 LI: 45
 MI: 42
 AMI: 99
This program is in compliance with Govt Code section 65583.2 (H) and (I).

Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Rezone 73.6 acres to allow for 272 residential units by March 2024 Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund
B1.2 Programs 7-1 through 7-8: Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU): – The element was revised to strengthen several programs under Policy 7 – Promote ADUs. The element included actions to monitor ADU production and if assumptions are not met, initiate additional actions including expedited plan check and waiving fees. However, given the Town’s reliance on ADUs and as found in HCD’s prior review, the element must include a commitment to adjusting projected assumptions if the number of units and affordability do not actualize during the planning period. Specifically, the degree of additional actions should be in stride with the degree of the gap in production and affordability. For example, if actual production and affordability of ADUs is far from anticipated trends, then the element must commit to amending the housing element, identifying additional sites, and rezoning within a timely manner (e.g., within six months).

Modified Programs 7-6 and 7-7:

Program 7-6: Develop an affordable ADU rental program that matches low-income tenants who have experienced displacement from areas outside of Portola Valley due to increasing rents with Portola Valley ADU owners willing to rent ADUs at below market rates. This program helps to address fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of affordable housing.

Assess every two years if the number of very low- and low-income ADUs is meeting the Town’s 6th cycle RHNA goals. If not, provide the following incentives:
 Provide incentives to homeowners to rent to Housing Choice Voucher Program (previously Section 8) and low-income households (like waiving fees or offering another financial incentive).

If trends indicate a potential substantial shortfall in meeting the estimated ADUs in the sites inventory, consider additional efforts to incentivize ADU production and reassess and revise the overall sites strategy for the RHNA by 2027 through adjusting ADU capacity assumptions with actual permitted units, and/or identifying additional sites for consideration to expand site capacity to the extent necessary to accommodate the RHNA.

Quantified Objective/Metric: Reach out to HIP Housing to match displaced tenants located outside of Portola Valley. Develop 28 ADUs as affordable to “very low-income” households and another 28 as affordable to “low-income” households. Assess ADU/JADU production every 2 years. If not meeting RHNA goals, provide additional incentives.

Geographic Targeting: Low-density neighborhoods
Time Frame: Develop program by May 2024. Assess ADU production every 2 years in March beginning in 2025.

Responsible Agency: Town staff
Financing Source: Affordable Housing Trust Fund
ATTACHMENT 5 Page 207 of 285
HCD COMMENTS ON DRAFT PORTOLA VALLEY ADOPTED HOUSING ELEMENT (DATED 7/25/23) (Changes to Programs shown in double underline and strikethrough text) 5 Comment
Number Comment Town Response
Program 7-7: Prepare pre-approved preliminary plans for ADUs and JADUs that are made available to property owners. These pre-approved plans would only require minimal additional engineering to account for the unique topography of sites and would significantly decrease the level of effort required of property owners in designing and permitting a JADU or ADU.

Assess every two years if ADU and JADU production is meeting the Town’s 6th cycle RHNA goals. If not, offer expedited plan check for ADU and JADU applications and organize a meeting with property owners that have constructed ADUs and interested property owners to understand the challenges and provide additional resources, as feasible to encourage ADU/JADU applications.

Quantified Objective/Metric: Establish pre-approved ADU and JADU plans. Develop 28 ADUs affordable to “moderate-income” households and 8 ADUs to “above moderateincome” households. Assess ADU/JADU production every 2 years. If not meeting RHNA goals, provide expedited plan check and meet with property owners two times per year.

Geographic Targeting: Low-density neighborhoods
Time Frame: Establish plans by June 2024. Assess ADU/JADU production every 2 years in March beginning in 2026.

Responsible Agency: Town staff
Financing Source: Affordable Housing Trust Fund
B1.3 Program 8-3: Emergency Shelters: – This Program includes a commitment to amend the zoning code to require on-site parking for all staff working in an emergency shelter. However, this Program should include a specific commitment to comply with AB139/Government Code section 65583, subdivision (a)(4)(A) which requires that parking for emergency shelters should only be the number of spaces necessary for staff working in the shelter and no more than other uses in the same zones.

Modified Program 8-3 to comply with AB139 to state that parking for emergency shelters be the number of spaces necessary for staff working in the shelter and no more than other uses in the same zones.

B1.4 Programs 1-4, 3-2 and 4-2: Affiliated Housing Sites: – The element identifies two sites that will not be rezoned but are anticipated to be developed under the Affiliated Housing Site Program including the 42 Acre Sequoia Housing Site and the Christ Church Affiliated Housing site. As found in HCD’s prior review, the element must include programs that commit to facilitating the development of these properties and commit to monitor production throughout the planning period and if necessary additional actions to identify additional capacity. While the element committed to establishing development standards; providing flexibility to those standards; conducting outreach and promoting technical assistance; the element still needs to include programs committing to monitoring the effectiveness of these efforts and stronger incentives to promote affordability.

Modified Program 1-4 that the Town will work with property owners, do outreach, provide additional incentives, if necessary.

Program 1-4: Currently the Affiliated Housing program is implemented through the Housing Element. With this update, the Municipal Code will be updated to further incentivize use of this program to provide affordable workforce housing and to establish the parameters and process for the Affiliated Housing program, including objective development standards and affordability requirements. To facilitate development under the Affiliated Housing program, the Town will work with property owners and mMaintain annual communication with program members to assess their progress and provide technical assistance. By mid-way through the RHNA cycle (2027), if trends indicate a potential shortfall in meeting the estimated units in the Sequoia Housing Site and Christ Church Site, the Town will consider additional efforts to incentivize the Affiliated Housing program to accommodate the RHNA.

Quantified Objective/Metric: Update the zoning code to include a combining district (overlay zone) and apply that district to six initial properties to facilitate the construction of 39 units.

Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Zoning code amendments to codify the program will be completed by early 2023.

Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council ATTACHMENT 5 Page 208 of 285
HCD COMMENTS ON DRAFT PORTOLA VALLEY ADOPTED HOUSING ELEMENT (DATED 7/25/23) (Changes to Programs shown in double underline and strikethrough text) 6 Comment
Number Comment Town Response
Financing Source: General Fund
B1.5 Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space Housing Site: – This site is an integral part of the addressing the Town’s lower-income RHNA.

Specifically, this site is accommodating roughly half of the Town’s lower-income RHNA. Additionally, this site is owned by the Town, therefore providing the Town a unique opportunity to provide much needed affordable housing. As such, the element needs to include significant actions to facilitate and encourage development on this site. The element should include a program with numerical objectives that ensures compliance with the Surplus Land Act, provides incentives and actions along with a schedule to facilitate development of this site. Actions should include outreach with developers, issuing requests for proposals, incentives, fee waivers, priority processing and financial assistance.

Modified Program 3-1 to add numerical objectives and ensure compliance with the Surplus Land Act:

Program 3-1: Initiate a site planning process for the sites in the new “Gateway” land use classification to make the most efficient use of the property and preserve open space. Pursue an affordable housing project on the Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space site in partnership with an affordable housing developer.  Maintain compliance Comply with provisions of the Surplus Land Act (Assembly Bill 1486- Ting, 2019) throughout the Housing Element period.  Establish and implement incentives to facilitate housing development including outreach with affordable housing developers, reduced development fees (partially using the Town’s existing Affordable Housing Trust Fund, if necessary), and priority processing.
 Potentially ground lease the site to the housing developer at a nominal rate.  Consider improvements to the baseball field as part of the site planning process.  Consider collaboration with Ladera Church to integrate their site into the Town’s affordable housing project.
 Establish an RFP process and solicit developers by January 2026.  If the Town receives appropriate responses to the RFP, then it will take these two steps:
o Target Exclusive Negotiating Agreement by Winter 2027 o Target land use entitlements issuance by Spring 2028
Quantified Objective/Metric: Meet with Ladera Church in June 2024. Begin site planning process and outreach with affordable housing developers in May 2025. Issue Request for Proposals to affordable housing developers by January 2026. Develop 50 very lowincome units developed.

Geographic Targeting: Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space and Ladera Church sites.

Time Frame: Issue RFP by January 2026.

Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund and Affordable Housing Trust Fund B2 2. The Housing Element shall contain programs which assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of extremely low-, very low-, low- and moderate-income households. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(2).) The element indicated that the Town will require set aside units for extremely low income (ELI) households within the Dorothy Ford Site.

However, the element must include specific actions to meaningfully address ELI households. As found in HCD's prior review, program actions could include prioritizing some funding for housing developments affordable to ELI households and offering financial incentives or regulatory concessions to encourage the development of housing types, such as multifamily, single-room occupancy (SRO) units, to address the identified housing needs for ELI households. For additional information, see the Building Blocks at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/extremely-low-income-housing-needs.

Added Program 2-4 with specific actions to meaningfully address ELI households:

Program 2-4: The Town understands the need to encourage and facilitate housing development for households earning 30% or less of the median family income. The Town will encourage development of housing for extremely low-income households through a variety of activities that include:
 Reach out to affordable housing developers.
 Reduce development fees (partially using the Town’s existing Affordable Housing Trust Fund, if necessary and as available).
 Provide priority processing.
 Assist applicants with identifying grant and funding opportunities.  Provide technical assistance to the extent possible.

Quantified Objective/Metric: 50 very low-income units developed.

Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Ongoing; as projects are processed by the Planning & Building Department.

By January 2026, reach out to affordable housing developers, and review and prioritize local funding at least twice in the planning period, and support expediting applications on an ongoing basis.

Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund and Affordable Housing Trust Fund B3 3. Address and, where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental and nongovernmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing, including housing for all income levels and housing for persons with disabilities. The program shall remove constraints to, and provide reasonable accommodations for housing designed for, intended for occupancy by, or with supportive services for, persons with disabilities. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(3).) Modified Program 4-1 to mitigate potential parking constraints for multifamily housing and include more specific details for affordable housing parking requirements:

ATTACHMENT 5 Page 209 of 285
HCD COMMENTS ON DRAFT PORTOLA VALLEY ADOPTED HOUSING ELEMENT (DATED 7/25/23) (Changes to Programs shown in double underline and strikethrough text) 7 Comment
Number Comment Town Response
As noted in Finding(s) A4 and A5, the element requires a complete analysis of potential governmental and nongovernmental constraints. Depending upon the results of that analysis, the Town may need to revise or add programs and address and remove or mitigate any identified constraints.

Program 4-1: Create new parking requirements for multifamily affordable housing based on best practices and local conditions including but not limited to mirroring the State Density Bonus Law (including zero parking spaces per unit for 100% supportive housing projects). The Town will ensure new parking requirements will not act as a potential constraint to new development.

Quantified Objective/Metric: Adopt code amendments.

Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Adopt prior to mid-2024 October 2023.

Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council Financing Source: General Fund
B4 4. The Housing Element shall include programs to conserve and improve the condition of the existing affordable housing stock. (Gov.

Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(4).)
HCD’s prior review found that the element must include programs to conserve and improve the condition of the housing stock. The element was revised to reference the Town’s ADU programs and indicated that the Town does not have a need for programs related to these issues. However, the housing needs assessment indicated that approximately ten units may require rehabilitation, but owners lack the discretionary income to fund these improvements. As found in HCD’s prior review, the element still should include programs to conserve and improve the housing stock. Strategies could include providing grants for substantial rehabilitation, provide matching grants for homeowner improvements, or implement proactive code enforcement program with resources.

Added a new Program 2-5 to conserve and improve the condition of housing stock:

Program 2-5: The Town will seek funding sources every 2 years and provide information regarding the availability of rehabilitation programs, including those through the Santa Mateo County, to targeted groups such as very low-, low- and moderate-income homeowners, owners of older residences, and owners of units occupied by lower-income seniors, and those on fixed incomes through an annual newsletter. Share information on the Town’s Home Sharing Program (see Program1-6).

Quantified Objective/Metric: Assist five very low- and low-income households Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Assess funding sources every 2 years and ongoing throughout planning period.

Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council Financing Source: General Fund
B5 5. Promote and affirmatively further fair housing opportunities and promote housing throughout the community or communities for all persons regardless of race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status, or disability, and other characteristics... (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(5).)
Goals, Priorities, Metrics, and Milestones: – While the element was revised to indicate that the Town’s fair housing actions include programs related to ADU, inclusionary housing and other efforts related to the RHNA, this generally does not address HCD’s prior review.

The element should be revised with aggressively numeric targets and geographic targets throughout the Town, including lowerdensity neighborhoods. Examples include creating more housing choices and affordability in single-family neighborhoods beyond complying with law (e.g., SB 9, ADUs), targeting affordable housing funding, homesharing programs, more than one junior accessory dwelling unit (per single family structure, enhancing capacity, affordability, and housing choices on religious institutional sites beyond the RHNA and other alternative land use strategies. Lastly, the element must be revised to include quantified metrics (beyond the RHNA) programs focused on housing mobility and increased housing opportunities and affordability.

The Town added geographic targets and numeric targets to programs. The Town also included Program 1-4 for codifying the Affiliated Housing program and a new Opt-in Housing Diversification Pilot Program 1-3 that work to promote more housing choices on religious institutional sites and lower-density neighborhoods.

Program 1-6 for homesharing was also added:

Program 1-6: Participate in Hip Housing’s “Home Sharing Program” as a way to improve housing opportunities for lower-income seniors and low-income Portola Valley residents.

Work with Hip Housing, which serves residents throughout San Mateo County. The Home Sharing program matches persons needing housing with homeowners who have available space. The Town will explore the feasibility of engaging Hip Housing or some similar organization to start a comparable program in Portola Valley. Implementing this program will support the Town’s housing mobility efforts to increase access to highresource neighborhoods in Portola Valley for low-income households and from other areas of San Mateo County that otherwise could not afford to live in Portola Valley, including single seniors on fixed incomes, persons with physical or developmental disabilities, and young adults seeking employment. This program can also include working with HIP to market units resulting from the Opt-in Pilot Program 3-1 and ADU programs 7-6 and 7-7.

Quantified Objective/Metric: As an outcome of these efforts, connect up to 10 eligible tenants to homes or opportunities in Portola Valley through the Home Sharing program to assist in housing mobility for eligible households.

Geographic Targeting: Low-density neighborhoods
Time Frame: Connect with Hip Housing by December 2024 to establish a shared housing program in Portola Valley. Develop an outreach program to inform Portola Valley residents about the shared housing program by June 2025.

Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund
ATTACHMENT 5 Page 210 of 285
HCD COMMENTS ON DRAFT PORTOLA VALLEY ADOPTED HOUSING ELEMENT (DATED 7/25/23) (Changes to Programs shown in double underline and strikethrough text) 8 ATTACHMENT 5 Page 211 of 285
_______________________________________________________________________ TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Jon Biggs, Interim Planning & Building Director
Adrienne Smith, Senior Planner
DATE: December 20, 2023
RE: Adoption of a Resolution Providing a Recommendation that the Town Council Adopt the proposed Portola Valley Housing Element and Conforming General Plan Amendments

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission receive a presentation from staff, ask questions, provide comments, receive public comments and adopt a resolution recommending that the Town Council adopt the Housing Element and conforming General Plan amendments.

MEETING FORMAT
This public meeting format will be as follows:
• Staff presentation: Housing Element changes requested by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)
• Planning Commission questions of staff
• Public Comments
• Planning Commission discussion and consideration of adoption of a resolution recommending to Town Council approval of the Housing Element and General Plan Conforming Amendments

MEETING PURPOSE
The purpose of this meeting is for the Planning Commission to review the latest changes to the Housing Element and General Plan. The latest Housing Element Draft #4 is shown in tracked changes and reflects alterations requested by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) in response to their July 25, 2023 comment letter. Limited updates have also been made to the General Plan for consistency with the updates made to the Housing Element. The Commission will also consider taking formal action to adopt a resolution recommending that the Town Council adopt the Housing Element and conforming General Plan amendments (see Attachment 2).

TOWN OF PORTOLA VALLEY

STAFF REPORT
ATTACHMENT 6 Page 212 of 285
Housing Element Update
Recommendation to Town Council December 20, 2023

Page 2 ends

BACKGROUND AND PAST PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT The Planning Commission first reviewed the Draft Housing Element at its June 15, 2022 meeting and proceeded to review the Housing Element and various other related Housing Element implementation work in subsequent meetings. See meeting information below for meeting links and topics and a document with all Housing Element-related public meetings and topics that have occurred beginning in 2021. Additional information on the Housing Element and overall update process is available at www.portolavalley.net/housing.
• October 19, 2022 – Review of draft Zoning Code Amendments • November 2, 2022 – Review of draft Zoning Code Amendments and Opt-In Program • November 16, 2022 – Comments on the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for Housing and Safety Elements and conforming General Plan and Zoning Code amendments
November 30, 2022 – General Plan conforming amendments and Zoning Code amendments, Opt-In Program, Housing Element Programs, Density Bonus Law • December 7, 2022 – General Plan conforming amendments, Zoning Code amendments • January 24, 2023 – IS/MND and Response to Comments Memo • February 15, 2023 – Adopted Resolution recommending Town Council Adopt the IS/MND and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
• March 6, 2023 - Adopted Resolution recommending Town Council Adopt the Housing Element and conforming General Plan amendments
• September 6, 2023 – Received staff update on Housing Element At its March 29, 2023 meeting, the Town Council adopted the Housing and Safety Elements’ Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) via Resolution 2922-2023. On May 10, 2023 Town Council adopted the draft Housing Element and conforming General Plan amendments via Resolution 2926-2023. The Town submitted the adopted package to HCD on May 25, 2023 and received its latest comment letter on July 25, 2023.

Housing Element Post-Adoption Implementation Plan
On September 13, 2023, the Town Council also received an update from council members Hasko and Taylor who presented a revised draft Housing Element Post-Adoption Implementation Plan, which contains a series of eight topics intended to support and enhance the Town’s ability to accommodate additional housing in accordance with the General Plan. Topic 6, the drafting of a Town Council policy for use of affordable housing funds, was completed on December 13, 2023 with the Town Council’s adoption of a policy for use.

DISCUSSION
Staff and Consultant Work with HCD Reviewer
Since the Town received the July 25, 2023 comment letter from HCD on its previous adopted Housing Element, the Town was assigned a new reviewer, who is also a supervisor and able to make judgment calls that other more junior reviewers (like the Town’s previous reviewer), were unable to make. Staff and the Town’s housing element consultant Urban Planning Partners (UPP) have now met six times with the HCD reviewer over Zoom. Throughout the process, the reviewer ATTACHMENT 6 Page 213 of 285
Housing Element Update
Recommendation to Town Council December 20, 2023

Page 3 ends

has been cooperative and helpful in ensuring staff had clear direction on how to be responsive to comments and keen to get the Town “to the finish line.” During the course of the sixth call with the reviewer on November 29, 2023, the reviewer offered staff the opportunity to submit the draft Housing Element for a preliminary review to occur alongside the Town’s regular review process. The reviewer stressed it was a limited time offer and needed to occur by the week’s end. This preliminary review is not intended as an official HCD review letter, but rather an opportunity to ensure that the latest Housing Element draft is substantially responsive to HCD comments and generally on track for ultimate HCD certification. The reviewer indicated a letter could potentially be delivered in time for the December 20, 2023 Planning Commission meeting. At the time of writing this staff report a letter from HCD has not yet been received, but staff are hopeful it will arrive in time.

Changes to Housing Element
Both the draft Housing Element and the General Plan updates are in tracked changes shown in redline. The most substantive change found in Housing Element Draft #4 are in Section 6, Adequate Sites and Section 7, Goals Policies and Programs. To best navigate the changes, review the cover memo and the detailed matrix of each HCD comment and the Town’s proposed response. A summary of notable changes is below:
• Additional certainty with the timing/availability of pipeline projects. HCD has required this kind of program in other jurisdictions. Staff added a new program to address this comment (see comment A3.1 in the Matrix).
• The Opt-In Diversification Program is now a pilot program, which gives the Town a little more flexibility in that the program can end after the stated maximum number of units are reached, and it will not be counted toward the Town’s RHNA. Additionally, the program is now categorized as an Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) program (see comment A3.2 in matrix).
• The zoning density for multi-family needs to be a minimum of 20 units per acre and the Town is required to provide a range. After discussions with the Town’s reviewer, they allowed 20- 23 units per acre. This is required because the Housing Element and rezoning was not in place at the start of the planning period (January 31, 2023). (See comment A3.3 in matrix). • ADU production. If there is a shortfall in anticipated ADU production, the reviewer required tweaks to the Town’s existing ADU programs prompting a review in its strategy and/or identifying additional sites to accommodate the shortfall (see comment B1.2 in the matrix. • Changes to the Dorothy Ford Field and Open Space site program. The reviewer required minor changes that clarify the timing of certain program steps (see comment B2 in matrix). • Changes to the Town’s overall RHNA that are reflected as a drop in the Town’s previous Total Unit Potential and the percentage (%) of buffer provided (see page 125 of the revised Housing Element).
o These changes are attributed to a modification to the Willow Commons pipeline project currently under construction, the re-classification of the 4394 Alpine Road housing site from multi-family to mixed-use, and the removal of the Opt-In program from the RHNA that was offset by ten additional above-moderate ADU’s.

ATTACHMENT 6 Page 214 of 285
Housing Element Update
Recommendation to Town Council December 20, 2023

Page 4 ends

Changes to General Plan
Throughout the update process staff have limited General Plan amendments solely to addressing any inconsistencies brought about by new policies in the Housing Element. Accordingly, removing or modifying language is only proposed if it directly excludes or prevents the uses proposed in the Housing Element. Staff have not made any significant changes to the General Plan since the Planning Commission last recommended to Town Council adoption of the previous amendments (see Attachment 3 for redline tracked changes). Below is a summary of changes:
• Comprehensive Plan Diagram:
o Changes to the Legend:
 Updated Mixed Use to be 3-6 du/ac
 Updated Medium Multi-Family to be 20-23 du/ac
 Added “Low” and “Medium” to the Multi-Family categories for clarity o Changed 4394 Alpine Road to be the MixedUse color on the map • Nathhorst Triangle Diagram:
o Changed 4394 Alpine Road to be Mixed Use pattern on the map o Changes to the Legend:
 Updated Mixed Use to be 3-6 du/ac
 Removed Multi-Family
• Land Use Element:
o Residential Category Table:
 Revised intensity of dwelling units per acre to be 20-23 du/ac for Multi-Family – Medium
 Revised intensity of dwelling units per acre to be 3-6 du/ac for Mixed-use o Changed text for 2106.2 Multi-Family – Medium description to be “no more than twenty-three dwelling units per acre.”
Consequences of Not Adopting the Housing Element
The State has a combination of incentives and penalties for not adopting the housing element in a timely manner. These penalties range from loss of local control over housing projects (i.e. “by right” approval), to imposition of minimum density requirements, to civil lawsuits and monetary penalties.

The penalties ramp up with increased delay. The builder’s remedy continues to be available during the window of time the Town does not have an approved Housing Element. Builder’s remedy projects do not need to comply with existing zoning regulations but do need to comply with CEQA. Staff anticipates the types of builder’s remedy applications that could be filed in Portola Valley could include multiple dwelling units in R-1 and R-E zones, rather than large multi-family buildings along the main corridors leading into and out of town. It is also possible the State may enact new penalties if jurisdictions continue to delay adopting their housing elements – the Town is now almost a year past the first statutory adoption deadline of January 31, 2023. The State is taking unprecedented steps in enforcing housing law as both HCD and the Attorney General’s Office have established enforcement divisions.

Also worth consideration is the strain on Town budget, staff continuity and the dwindling Cycle 6 housing element period. The longer the Housing Element process goes on, the more Town dollars will be required for consultant fees. Also, the Town’s Interim Panning Director is up to speed on the Town’s long Housing Element history and process. His tenure will reach an end in February and if the Housing Element is not adopted by then, the next director will have to begin anew. Finally, there ATTACHMENT 6 Page 215 of 285
Housing Element Update
Recommendation to Town Council December 20, 2023

Page 5 ends

are now seven years remaining in the current 2023-2031 Cycle 6 eight-year housing element period.

The Town has a multitude of critical programs that need to be initiated with stated goals and timelines and the Town needs to start the work of implementing its Housing Element.

Other Related Updates
The following updates are provided to keep the Commission and public informed on related items:
• Zoning Code Updates to Implement Housing Element – In late 2022, the Planning Commission made significant progress on updates to the zoning code; however, that work was paused to focus on the Housing Element itself. The zoning code amendments need to be adopted before HCD can certify the Town’s Housing Element. Assuming the Housing Element is adopted by Town Council by January 31, 2024, staff will bring the Zoning Code amendments to Planning Commission and Town Council over the course of February and March 2024, while the Town awaits a response from HCD on the Housing Element (see PostAdoption HCD Review Process below for further discussion on process). • 7+13 Joint Work Plan with WFPD – A draft work plan has been jointly prepared by staff of the Town of Portola Valley and the Woodside Fire Protection District, and was presented to Town Council at its December 13, 2023 meeting. The work plan is intended to implement the seven mitigation requests from the WFPD as well as the 13 “Key Approaches” to fire safety, which were previously presented to the Planning Commission. Implementation of specific work plan items will require formal action by the Town Council or Woodside Fire Protection District Board of Directors.
• Safety Element Update – A draft Safety Element was reviewed by Town Committees and the staff/consultant team have started to analyze those comments. Given the urgency of the Housing Element updates, staff anticipates the adoption of the Safety Element will be delayed. It is not yet possible to develop a new timeline as analysis of the HCD letter is ongoing. The current Safety Element remains in effect while the new Safety Element is developed. There is not a specific State law deadline for adoption of the Safety Element. • Jurisdictional Update on Housing Element Status – Redwood City, Brisbane and South San Francisco are the only jurisdictions in San Mateo County with adopted Housing Elements certified by HCD. Burlingame’s Housing Element has been found by HCD to be in substantial compliance with the law and pending adoption, will be fully certified.

Public Comments
At the time of writing this report, eight public comments were sent to the Town’s housing email account. Several additional comments related to the Town’s Housing Element sent to Town Council are also included (Attachment 4). As applicable, any additional comments received up to 12:00pm on December 20, 2023 will be posted to the meeting calendar page.

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
On March 29, 2023, the Town Council adopted pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-MND) prepared for the Portola Valley Housing and Safety Elements Update and Conforming General Plan and Zoning Code Amendments. The Town Council adopted the Housing Element on May 10, 2023.

In response to comments received from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on July 25, 2023, the Housing Element is being amended. Many of the revisions consist of providing additional information or clarifying proposed policies. There are a few ATTACHMENT 6 Page 216 of 285
Housing Element Update
Recommendation to Town Council December 20, 2023

Page 6 ends

changes that modify the number of units in the site inventory, although the changes reduce the number of units from 147 to 120.

The IS-MND has been reviewed to determine if any of the aforementioned revisions to the Housing Element would require modifications to the document. As discussed above, the number of overall units has decreased by 27 units. There are no proposed changes in the project or changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is being undertaken, which will require revisions to the IS-MND. All mitigation measures in the IS-MND remain valid and reduce all project-related impacts to a less-than-significant level.

NEXT STEPS
Post-Adoption HCD Review Process
Once the Housing Element is adopted, it will be submitted to HCD for formal review and certification. During the HCD review period (up to 60 days), Planning Commission and Town Council will consider the Zoning Code amendments necessary to implement the Housing Element.

Upcoming (tentative) schedule related to the Housing Element:
• January 10, 2023 – Town Council consideration of adoption of the Housing Element and conforming General Plan Amendments
• February and March – Planning Commission and Town Council consideration of Zoning Code amendments

ATTACHMENTS

1. Updated Housing Element (Draft #4 – without Appendices) https://www.portolavalley.net/home/showdocument?id=17202&t=638133529070305578

2. Draft Resolution Recommending Town Council Adoption of Housing Element and Conforming General Plan Amendments

3. Conforming General Plan Amendments

4. Public Comments
ATTACHMENT 6 Page 217 of 285

Page 218 of 285 ends

ATTACHMENT 7 Page 219 of 285
By signing the letter below, you understand this letter will be shared withTown Council. It will be sent at 11am tomorrow, Wednesday, in advance of the Wednesday meeting and, possibly, again as more signers join the letter. Share with your network that feels similarly. 12/12/2023
Dear Town Council,
I support Affordable Housing. Please optimize efforts, finish the work and submit the Housing Plan for certification by the 1/31/24 deadline.

Katherine Gilpin
● 15 year resident
● Involved in schools, PVSD and President WHS Foundation 2021-Present ● Forme Alpine Hills Youth Committee Co-Chair
● Parents of two teens at WHS
Sue Ten
● 9 year resident
● Former Board member PVSF and current Board member WHSF ● Two children who attended PVSD and WHS.

Crystal Ciancutti
● 17 year resident
● Past chair of the PV Holiday Fair
● Co-founder of the PV Women’s Club
● Three kids in the PV School District
Tammy Crown
● 20 year resident
● Former PVSF Advisory Board member
● Two children who attended PVSD.

Jeff Klugman
● 20 year resident
● Former PVSD Board Member; Former PVSD School Board President ● Two children who attended PVSD.

ATTACHMENT 7 Page 220 of 285
May Chen
● 20 year resident
● Prior PVSD Volunteer
● Medical Oncologist (MD) at Stanford
● Two children who attended PVSD.

Kei Befu
Anna Busse
•7 year resident
•Stanford Professor
•PV Ranch Board Member
•3 children who attend PVSD and Woodside
Kwok Lau
•37 year resident
•Friends of the Portola Library - coPresident
•Former Alpine Hills Club Board President
•Past PVSD parent volunteer - 2 children
•Active in Bay Area Nonprofits
Susan Silberman
•11 year resident
•Former PVSD volunteer, current WHS volunteer
•Child attended PVSD schools and currently at WHS
Aimee Armsby
● 13-year resident
● Member, PV School District Board of Trustees
● Alpine Hills Board Member
● PV Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee member
● Woodside HS Foundation Board member
● Past President, PV Schools Foundation
● Member, SMC Countywide Oversight Board
● 2 kids + 2 stepkids attended PV schools
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 221 of 285
Elizabeth Holmes
● 16 year resident
● Interior Designer with in town business
● 3 children PVSD k-8
● 2 currently at Priory
Mike Armsby
● 13-year resident
● Former President and Board member of Alpine Hills Swim & Tennis Club ● Finance Committee for Portola Valley Schools Foundation ● 4 kids who all attended PV schools
Sarah Dorahy
● 11 year resident
● Former PTO President Ormondale
● Former PVSD Auction Co-Chair
● 3 children attended PV schools
Maryann Moise
● 31 year resident
● Former PV Council Mayor/Councilmember (17 years)
● Former San Mateo County Board Member OneShoreline, CCAG, Express Lanes, Library JPA, Commute.org, Heart
● Board Member Peninsula and South Bay YIMBY Action
● Former PTO President Corte Madera
● Former PVSD Foundation Member
● Former PVSD Bond Measure Co-Chair
● 2 children attended PV Schools
Rebecca Flynn
● 23 year resident
● ASCC
● ADU Ambassador
● PV Sustainability committee
● PV Water Conservation Committee
● PV Parks & Rec committee
● Town Center Committee
● PVSD bond measure oversight committee
● 2 children attended PV schools
● Former PVSD volunteer
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 222 of 285
● Former WHS volunteer
● Sequoia High School PTA Treasurer
● PVForum founder and moderator (19 years)
Dave Cardinal
● 35-year resident
● Founding member of PV’s original Website Committee
● Former volunteer with PVSD, PVSF, WFPD, and FOPVL
● Former President Alpine Hills Tennis & Swim Club
● Big believer in bringing economic diversity to our town Jerry Shefren
● 40 year resident of Portola Valley and 10 year resident of Ladera ● Director of the Sequoia Healthcare District
● Member Emergency Preparedness Committee
● CERT member PV Branch
● Strongly believe in affordable housing in PV
Lorrie Duval
● 35-year year resident of Portola Valley
● Former Member, Emergency Preparedness and Wildfire Preparedness Committees
● Former Board Member, CERPP, WFPD’s early Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) program
● Former Board Member, Friends of the Portola Valley Library (FOPVL) ● One daughter attended PVSD schools
● Volunteer coordinator, Portola Valley Neighborhood Watch ● Strongly believe in affordable housing in PV
Jane Wilson
● 20 year resident
● ASCC (current Chair)
● Former Parks and Recreation Committee
● Former PTO President, Corte Madera
● Former PVSD volunteer
● Former Woodside High School Foundation Board member
● Former Friends of Portola Valley Library (10 years)
● 2 children attended PV schools
● Former Co-chair of Portola Valley Holiday Fair
● Co-founder Portola Valley Quilting Group
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 223 of 285
● Friends of Sausal Creek volunteer
Randy Von Feldt
● Former PV Schools Foundation Co-President
● Former Board Member Alpine Hills
● 22 year resident
Debbie Dalzell and Mark Wilson
● 30 year residents
● Alpine Hills Members
● Kids attended PV Schools
Katherine H Terhune (aka Ratcliff)
● 51 year resident
● Active with many meetings and pursuits of committees. (never formally a volunteer as yet)
Bill Unger
● 15 year Portola Valley Resident
Anne Kopf-Sill
● 35-year Portola Valley resident
● Former member and chair of PV Emergency Preparedness Committee ● Currently, PV Planning Commissioner
● Planning Commissioner representative to PV’s Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee
● Former member (6 years) and Chair (2 years) of Woodside High School Foundation
● Chair (many years) of Woodside High School’s Season of Sharing Program Caroline Diarte Edwards
● 8 year PV resident
● Owner of international admissions coaching business
● 4 children through PVSD; 2 currently at CMS, 2 at Priory ● Regular school volunteer at PVSD and Priory
● Former AYSO board member
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 224 of 285
Heriberto Diarte
● 8 year PV resident
● Venture investor
● 4 children through PVSD; 2 currently at CMS, 2 at Priory ● Ex member of PV’s Parks and Recreation Committee
● Ex member of the PV School Foundation and the PV School Audit committee ● Current member of Woodside Priory Board of Trustees
John Richards
● 58 year resident
● Former Town Council member / mayor (13 years)
● Former Planning Commission member (4 years)
● Former ASCC member (8 years)
● Attended Portola Valley schools, as did 2 kids
● Architect and builder of 16 ADU’s in PV
Sharon Richards
● 38 year resident
● Put up with husband on the council for 13 years
Alex Von Feldt
● 22 year resident
● 2 children in PV Schools
● Former Conservation Committee member, ASCC Commissioner and Planning Commissioner
● Friends of Sausal Creek member
● Local environmental leader who sees the need for affordable housing to allow young environmental professionals an option to stay in our community Al Sill
● 35 year resident
● Past member and chair of Water Conservation Committee ● Past member and chair of the ASCC
● Past member of Sustainability and Wildfire Preparedness Committees ● Vice-chair of ad hoc housing element committee
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 225 of 285
Matt Rollefson
● 12 year resident
● 2 children in PV schools
Joyce Shefren
● 40 year resident in PV–10 previous years in Ladera
● Former Board member of League of Women Voters of South San Mateo County Chair of housing committee for LWVSSMC
● Former member of Trails Committee in PV
● Strong supporter of affordable housing in PV
Brooke Day
● 13 year resident
● Former PTO President, Ormondale
● Former PVSD Board Member; Former PVSD School Board President ● Child attended PVSD and Woodside Priory in Portola Valley. ● Current PVSD Parcel Tax Committee Member
Neil Day
● 13 year resident
● Former PVSD Volunteer
● Child attended PVSD and Currently attends Woodside Priory in Portola Valley.

Dan Cornew
● 25 year resident
● Former PVSD Volunteer
● 4 Children attended PVSD
Rosalie Cornew
● 25 year resident
● Former PVSD Volunteer
● 4 Children attended PVSD
● Founder of Portola Valley new family welcome program
● Town volunteer
Mary Nam
● 13 yr resident
● 2 children attended PVSF
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 226 of 285
Serra B. Simbeck
● 19 year resident
● 3 children attended PVSD
● Former Co-President PV Schools Foundation
● Former Co-Chair PV Schools Endowment
● Strong believer in need for affordable housing in PV to allow for a more diverse and inclusive community
Mauricio Simbeck
● 19 year resident
● 3 children attended PVSD
● Local Latino business owner
● Supporter of local affordable housing to allow for a more diverse and inclusive community
Linda Kamran
● 9 year resident
● 4 children attend PVSD & Woodside HS
● Current Co-President, PV Schools Foundation
● Chair, PV Schools Parcel Tax Campaign
Steve Toben
● 32 year resident
● Former mayor (2006, 2010)
● Former member, PV Town Council (2003-11)
● Former PV Planning Commissioner (199-2003)
Jon Goulden
● 37 year resident
● Current Planning Commissioner
● Former Co-President, PV Schools Foundation
● Former parent volunteer at Ormondale and Corte Madera ● Former cub scout leader
● Partner at Silicon Valley Social Ventures
Patty White
● 23 year resident
● Former parent and volunteer at Ormondale and Corte Madera ● 2 children attended PV Schools
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 227 of 285
Susan McLaughlin
● 12 year resident
● Former PTO President Ormondale
● Former parent volunteer at Ormondale and Corte Madera ● Treasurer, Measure Z Campaign
● 2 children attended PV schools
Amy White
● 23 year resident
● Attended Ormondale and Corte Madera
● Employee at Roberts Market and Woodside Priory
-Submitted to Town Counceil at 11:15am Wed, 12/13/24-
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 228 of 285
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 229 of 285
December 11, 2023
I am subscribed to all communication within the Town of Portola Valley. I have participated in almost all meetings; yet I did not know about today’s deadline.

I did not get the email. Was it announced during the Town Council meetings? With only 15 minutes before its deadline, here are my comments:

Portola Valley is a low density, rural community (See our General Plan and the goals of our founders) The letter submitted to HCD was flawed from the beginning. Reviewing draft #4 continues to use the same flawed and outdated data; therefore, this new draft is not acceptable.

The list of meetings summarized in Appendix A are correct; however, the input from residents at these these meetings were never summarized correctly and comments regarding these meetings continue to be overlooked.

The efforts continue to be described as “collaborative” efforts, but once again the proposals in draft #4 cannot be built in Portola Valley.
- the data used for this project is outdated.
- the data reflects San Mateo and Santa Clara county, not Portola Valley. - Staff and Town Government failed to address the safety element and all others problems like traffic, outdated infrastructure, reliable communication, housing needs for existing families...etc for the last 10 years.

Draft #4 lists only a few State Laws to justify additional high density housing, but failed to list the other state laws that protect the safety in our community, the rights of homeowners, the responsibilities of local government…etc.

Urban Planning once again presents a draft that promotes high density housing in a low density rural community with a long list of projects that should have been fixed at least ten years ago.

It is time the Planning Department, Town Council, and staff look at the reality, not unrealistic promises.

Thank you,
Caroline Vertongen
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 230 of 285
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 231 of 285
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 232 of 285
pursue any development; a separate crime in and of itself.

I urge the Town Council and Planning Department to protect the rural entrance into Portola Valley, the scenic corridor and the Open Spaces in our town, and leave the Dorothy Fork Park and Open Space out of any consideration for development.

Sincerely,
Martin B. Miller, MD
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 233 of 285
From: Kristi Corley
To: housing
Subject: Housing Element
Date: Monday, December 11, 2023 5:02:01 PM
Portola Valley Planning Department,
I do not believe Dorothy Park Open Space should be considered for a housing site. This land was the first open space land donated to the Town of Portola Valley. The intent of the donors was to keep this land as Open Space and Recreational space with a baseball field.

All the best,
Kristi Corley
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 234 of 285
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 235 of 285
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 236 of 285
To: CA Dept of Housing and Community Development
From: Robert Turcott, MD, PhD (Portola Valley resident) Re: Comments on Portola Valley’s Draft (Dec 2023) Housing Element December 11, 2023
The Town of Portola Valley has understated the fire hazard severity in areas of proposed highdensity development, ignored existing fire safety policies designed to protect lives and property in these areas, ignored the local Fire District’s repeated warnings against these policies changes, and, in ignoring the safety provisions that the Fire District says are necessary in these hazardous areas, will needlessly expose current and future residents to increased risk.

Who will disproportionately suffer from this increased risk? Occupants of affordable housing.

In revising its Housing Element, the Town of Portola Valley ignored the fire hazard assessment that has been in its General Plan since 2010. That assessment was rigorously obtained by expert fire ecologist Ray Moritz, who comprehensively considered topography, slope steepness, slope aspect, weather factors during fire season, and evacuation vulnerability. He did so with much greater resolution and fidelity than Cal Fire was capable of. That assessment has also served as the basis for fire safety policies in Portola Valley since 2010. These policies were also ignored in revising the Housing Element.

The figures below show the fire hazard map as it has appeared in our General Plan since 2010 and a color rendering for readability with sites of proposed high-density development depicted.

For comparison, an equivalent rendering of what was submitted with the Housing Element revision is also provided.

ATTACHMENT 7 Page 237 of 285
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 238 of 285
The existing Safety Element prohibits development in such hazardous areas unless adequate safety measures are taken:

What are adequate mitigation measures? The Fire District defined them in a Jan 4, 2023 letter to the Town and reiterated them in a March 29, 2023 communication (see Appendix).

The Town rationalized the removal of the fire hazard assessment from the General Plan by rebranding it as a mere “vegetation map” - a mere catalogue of vegetation types. Staff repeatedly misinformed town officials and the public that important intensifying factors of wildfire were ignored, despite clear evidence that they weren’t.

ATTACHMENT 7 Page 239 of 285
For example,
• see the presentation the fire hazard assessment’s methodology by its author to the Feb 1, 2022 Wildfire Preparedness Committee:
https://youtu.be/DKpGpPiqUPw?si=4p9ctLQmbTsh28j8
• Consider the description of the fire hazard assessment in the current General Plan:
• Consider the description of the fire hazard assessment methodology in a contemporaneous April 18, 2008 memo by the Town Planner George Mader (see appendix) Finally, Woodside Fire Protection District’s objections to these dangerous changes were persistent but ignored. Please see the Districts Sept 13, 2022 and Jan 4, 2023 (misdated Jan 4, 2022) letters, as just two examples.

I urge you to compel the Town of Portola Valley to provide an honest accounting of its fire hazard and prompt implementation of the fire safety measures that the Fire District says are necessary to protect lives.

Thank you,
Robert Turcott, MD, PhD
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 240 of 285
Woodside Fire Protection District letter to Town of Portola Valley, Jan 4, 2023 (note, the letter is misdated Jan 4, 2022)
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 241 of 285
1 Woodside Fire Protection District
Fire Prevention Bureau
808 Portola Road Portola Valley, Ca. 94028
(650) 851-1594
www.woodsidefire.org
Don Bullard – Fire Marshal

January 4, 2022
Dear Portola Valley Town Council,
I understand the Town of Portola Valley is currently performing an assessment under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of the impact that proposed amendments to its General Plan and Municipal Code would have on public safety, including the impact they would have on wildfire hazards and risk. While the district is generally aware that the Town is in the process of amending its General Plan and Municipal Code, it does not have a clear understanding of the totality of changes the Town is proposing to make to its existing land use, development and zoning policies or ordinances, or the specific details of all such changes.

To my knowledge, the Town has not asked the district to assess the impact that the Town’s proposed amendments would have on public safety, fire operations, fire prevention, wildfire hazards and risk, or its evacuation capacity and capability. Nor, to my knowledge, has the Town asked the district to comment on the findings and conclusions set forth in its CEQA analysis (Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration or “IS/MND”) regarding such matters. While a competent assessment of such impacts would obviously require extensive information detailing the specific changes in policy and regulations the Town proposes to make, to date, I am not aware of the Town providing the district the specific information needed to perform such an assessment.

Although Town staff and consultants have on occasion contacted the district for feedback on specific fire safety and prevention issues, the issues for which feedback is sought have been narrowly framed and accompanied by limited information. As an example, the Town’s planning consultant contacted the district on July 18, 2022, stating “We are writing to you to request information regarding the project’s potential impact related to physical facilities necessary to provide adequate fire protection services,” and provided a brief summary of five sites for potential development.

In a similar vein, last month when the Town requested an informal assessment of the existing fire hazard severity of five potential development sites, I was unaware that it would later be used to support proposed zoning changes at those locations. If I had known the intended use of this information, I would have requested greater insight into the changes that were proposed and performed a far more comprehensive investigation and assessment.

The district is eager to work with the Town to provide an informed and comprehensive assessment of the direct and cumulative impact of the Town’s proposed General Plan and Municipal Code amendments on public safety. The district urges the Town to draw on the district’s experience and competency to help assess the impact that its proposed amendments can have on the existing and future wildfire hazards and risk within the community and the district more broadly, their impact on evacuation capacity and fire protection services, the propriety of the Town’s proposed negative declaration of “No Significant ATTACHMENT 7 Page 242 of 285
2 Impacts” on wildfire hazard and risk, and the nature and extent of mitigation measures that should be taken to alleviate such impacts.

Based on the district’s preliminary review of the Town’s published IS/MND’s assessment of impacts on wildfire hazards and risk, the district believes the assessment contained in the IS/MND has several important deficiencies. In particular, the district wishes to point out the following deficiencies in the published IS/MND:

1. Assessment of Existing Wildfire Hazards. Any assessment of the impact on public safety of proposed changes in land use or in the location, density or nature of development should begin with a baseline assessment and characterization of the existing hazards the land presents. The 2008 Moritz map, adopted in the Town’s 2010 Safety element as the basis on which the Town characterizes and assesses its existing wildfire hazards, is currently the best, most accurate and reliable characterization, and assessment of the existing natural fire hazards within Portola Valley.

The district is currently in the process of developing a new assessment of district-wide wildfire hazards and risks which will, in time, hopefully provide a superior, updated assessment. The district believes that an accurate, comprehensive assessment of wildfire hazards within the district and the risk such hazards pose is of paramount importance, and it is committed to developing the most competent, accurate and informative assessment it can as quickly as possible.

Until that time, however, the district believes the Moritz map provides the most accurate and reliable fire hazard assessment available on which to base decision-making regarding proposed land use planning, zoning, and development.

The Moritz map was developed in 2008 after the fire district identified several short-comings and omissions in the fire hazard maps prepared by Cal Fire for the local responsibility areas within the district’s jurisdiction. At the fire district’s recommendation, Ray Moritz, an experienced and highly respected fire arboriculturist, was retained by the Town to assess the severity and extent of its natural fire hazards based on an aerial and ground surveillance of the entire town and its immediate surroundings.

The methodology used by Moritz to prepare his hazard assessment and map adapted and improved on the methodology used by Cal Fire for its hazard assessment and maps. Like Cal Fire, Moritz characterized both the topography and vegetation of Portola Valley’s lands according to directly comparable standards of fire hazard. He did so, however, with much greater resolution and precision than Cal Fire was able to apply. Unlike Cal Fire, he characterized the topography of Portola Valley’s lands at much higher resolution, which enabled him to identify physical features of the landscape (ravines, ridgelines, chimneys, aspect) that can cause rapid fire expansion and spread. Unlike Cal Fire, he ground-truthed the lands he characterized, which enabled him to confirm the type, density and vertical as well as horizontal distribution of vegetative fuels on the landscape. And unlike Cal Fire, he characterized each of eleven (11) different vegetative fuel types present on the landscape, which enabled him to better resolve the burnability and interaction of vegetative fuels on the land. All of this in combination enabled him to better assess the locations, density, and hazards of the many different natural fuel complexes throughout Portola Valley.

I have repeatedly cautioned the Town’s Planning Department that the Moritz map provides a superior basis for planning purposes and not to use the Cal Fire map. On May 12, 2022, I wrote you and others questioning the Town’s preliminary draft Safety element, which used the 2008 Cal Fire map in lieu of the Moritz map. When the planning department persisted in using the Cal Fire ATTACHMENT 7 Page 243 of 285
3 map as the basis for its Town-wide assessment of fire hazards in its draft Safety element, I again wrote you on September 13, 2022, and explicitly warned against its use:
“The district does not approve of or support the use of the limited CalFire map from 2008 as it is too old and too limited based on our assessments. You may recall that the district rejected this map as too limited even back in 2008. It is not a safe and accurate map to approve in 2022 either.”
I went on to note that the district also disagreed with the Town’s assessment of its wildfire hazards as reported in its FEMA Hazard and Risk Ranking:
“The district feels that the Town should update the wildfire ranking to be more in alignment with the Fire District and the Town of Woodside. Both the Fire District and the Town of Woodside have ranked wildfire of the highest hazard where Portola Valley has ranked it as medium to almost low hazard. The Town of Portola Valley should update their MJLHMP as soon as possible to reflect the true wildfire hazards faced by the Town.” The district believes the Moritz map provides the most accurate and reliable fire hazard assessment currently available on which to base Portola Valley’s land use planning, zoning, and development decision-making. Until the district’s updated hazard maps are approved and adopted, the Moritz map, not the 2008 Cal Fire map, should be used to assess the impact of proposed changes in the Town’s land use policies and development regulations on wildfire hazards and risk. The Moritz map, not the 2008 Cal Fire map, should form the basis on which any CEQA assessment of the environmental impact of the Town’s proposed General Plan and Municipal Code amendments is based.

The Town’s 2010 Safety element expressly adopts the Moritz map as the approved basis for assessment and regulation of the impact of proposed development within Town on wildfire hazards and risk. 2010 Safety element §4138. Nonetheless, the Town’s current draft Safety element and the IS/MND both appear to use the less accurate assessment of fire hazard contained in the 2008 Cal Fire map as the stated baseline assessment of wildfire hazard and risk for the community. The district is unaware of any sound justification for this change.

The district believes that substitution of the 2008 Cal Fire assessment of hazard for the Moritz assessment of hazard will under-state and misrepresent the impact that proposed development can have on wildfire hazard and risk within the Town. For example, the 2008 Cal Fire map used in both the current draft Safety element and in the IS/MND as the baseline depiction of wildfire hazard within Portola Valley shows approximately 6% of Town as Very High Fire Hazard Severity and 0% of Town as High Fire Hazard Severity. By way of comparison, the Moritz map characterizes approximately 40% of Town as Highest Hazard and 49% of Town as High Hazard. It is hard to imagine a starker contrast.

Substitution of the 2008 Cal Fire assessment for the Moritz assessment also acts to inappropriately downplay the need for appropriate measures to mitigate the impacts on hazard and risk such development would entail.

The district believes that any CEQA analysis of the impact of the Town’s proposed General Plan and Municipal Code amendments on wildfire hazard and risk should be based on the Moritz map, not the 2008 Cal Fire map, and that a CEQA analysis of the Town’s proposed amendments based on the Moritz map will differ significantly from the assessment currently provided in the IS/MND.

ATTACHMENT 7 Page 244 of 285
4 2. Elimination of Important Fire Prevention Policies. The Town’s 2010 Safety element sets forth several important wildfire prevention and protection policies that are keyed into and based on the Moritz hazard assessment and map. For example, in all areas of Town characterized by Moritz as Highest Hazard, the Safety element prohibits construction for human occupancy unless adequate mitigation reduces fire risk to an acceptable level.
“Do not construct buildings for human occupancy, critical facilities and high value structures in areas classified as having the highest fire risk unless it is demonstrated that mitigation measures will be taken to reduce the fire risk to an acceptable level.” 2010 Safety element § 4151(1)(emphasis added).

In all areas of Town characterized by Moritz as High Hazard or greater, the Safety element mandates for each new subdivision a study that describes its wildfire risk, the factors contributing to that risk, actions to reduce the risk to an acceptable level, the cost and means of providing fire protection to the subdivision, and an indication of who pays for that. 2010 Safety element § 4151(2)(emphasis added). Similarly, in all areas characterized as High Hazard or greater, the Safety element mandates special protective measures to control spread of fire and provide safety to occupants, including but not limited to types of construction and use of appropriate materials. 2010 Safety element § 4151(6). And the Safety element calls for establishment of a public information program based on the Moritz assessment to inform residents of local fire hazards and how they can be reduced. 2010 Safety element § 4151(5). It also calls upon homeowners to provide adequate clearance around structures to prevent spread of fire and ensure adequacy emergency access and fire suppression.

The policies outlined in the Town’s 2010 Safety element laudably apply several of the most important wildfire prevention principles:

First, fire safe land use, development and construction of our built environment constitute the first line of defense against wildfire expansion and spread. Prudent location, layout, design, and construction of our built environment are often the most cost-effective and important steps we can take to protect our families and our communities against the destruction caused by wildfire.

Second, the severity of wildfire hazard and risk posed by lands used or developed for human use should govern and determine the stringency of fire prevention and protection regulations and standards for the land’s use and development. This well-recognized principle was pioneered in part by the Town’s adoption of its seismic safety policies and regulations in the early 1970s. It is now thoroughly embodied in State law and widely championed by both Cal Fire and the National Fire Protection Association in their minimum fire safe development regulations and wildland fire protection standards.

Third, in assessing the impact of land use and development, it is important to distinguish between the concept of “hazard” and the concept of “risk.” The concept of “fire hazard” refers to the propensity for fire to expand, intensify and spread from a given fuel complex (as defined by the kind, arrangement, volume, condition, and location of fuel sources on the landscape). The concept of “fire risk” refers to the probability and severity of adverse effects that can result from exposure to a given fire hazard. For example, a severe fire hazard within an undeveloped forest may pose very little risk, whereas the same fire hazard near or within a populated residential neighborhood may pose severe risk. Thus, while fire hazards are important to identify and mitigate, not all hazards pose severe risk, ATTACHMENT 7 Page 245 of 285
5 and it is the hazards that pose the greatest risk that should be our greatest priority to mitigate.

Fourth, in assessing wildfire risk, the propensity for rapid fire expansion and spread within populated residential areas is of paramount concern. Not only does it determine the limited time available to contain and hopefully control the spread of fire, but it also determines the number and distribution of people and resources that must be protected and/or evacuated, the speed with which that must be accomplished, and the resources needed to do so.

Accurately and candidly assessing the risk posed to residential communities such as Portola Valley is also essential to acquiring, training, and deploying the appropriate resources and measures needed for effective, safe emergency response. And it is also essential to identifying, prioritizing, and funding the most important mitigation measures that can be taken in advance of any fire to reduce extreme risk.

Fifth, effective assessment of wildfire hazard and risk on WUI lands as topographically variable and fire prone as Portola Valley requires an individuated assessment of each important fuel complex in the context of its particular setting, the fuel sources comprising the hazard, and the lands, resources and fuels sources surrounding it. Cal Fire, the National Fire Protection Association, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and the insurance industry’s Institute for Business and Home Safety all agree. A “one size fits all” approach to land use and development will not adequately account for the site-to-site differences in hazard and risk that characterize Portola Valley’s fire-prone, vertiginous terrain and built environment.

Sixth, effective mitigation can and will save lives and other valued resources. Nowhere is the adage “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure” more apt. A comprehensive, accurate assessment of hazard and risk is essential to the effective identification of appropriate, cost-effective mitigation steps as well as their prioritization.

The fire prevention policies adopted in the Town’s 2010 Safety element outline some of the most progressive principles required for effective long-term reduction of exposure to the risk of uncontrolled wildfire in WUI communities such as Portola Valley. By emphasizing the hazard and extreme risk posed by rapid fire spread, by calling for more stringent land use and development protections in areas of heightened fire hazard, by calling for individuated, project-by-project and subdivision-by-subdivision assessment of impacts on risk as well as fire hazard in areas of heightened hazard, and by linking the need for mitigation to risk, not just hazard, the 2010 Safety element anticipated many of the most important safeguards now championed by Cal Fire and the National Fire Protection Association.

In September 2022, when the district previously submitted comments on the draft Safety element, it was unaware and uninformed that the 2010 Safety element contained these important policies, and I wrote you noting that the Town’s current draft Safety element omitted such policies. That is why I provided written comments calling for the addition of policies to implement some of these important principles.

I now understand that the current draft Safety element no longer supports some of the more important fire prevention policies previously adopted in the 2010 Safety element, but instead substitutes in their place new, less protective policies. These new policies would:
• Eliminate application of the Town’s fire prevention policies to much of Portola Valley by substituting the 2008 Cal Fire map for the Moritz map
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 246 of 285
6 • Eliminate application of the Town’s fire prevention subdivision policies to areas of Town characterized as High Fire Hazard Severity and restrict their application to only those areas of Town characterized in the 2008 Cal Fire map as Very High Fire Hazard Severity • Eliminate the mandate for an individuated site-by-site assessment of fire risk associated with each development in areas of Town characterized as Highest Hazard • Eliminate the mandate for mitigation measures by developments within Highest Hazard areas to reduce risk to acceptable levels, substituting instead compliance with the minimum requirements of Cal Fire’s fire safe development standards irrespective of risk • Eliminate the requirement for special protective measures to control spread of fire and provide safety to occupants in all High and Highest Hazard areas, substituting instead design measures to enhance fire protection of structures Perhaps most importantly, the draft Safety element’s substitution of compliance with minimum hazard reduction standards for the requirement set forth in the existing Safety element for individuated site-specific assessment and mitigation of fire risk does not, in my opinion, adequately protect public safety against fire risk. As noted above, the paramount goal of effective wildfire risk reduction is the prevention and/or containment of rapid-fire expansion and spread to neighboring homes and fuel complexes. Achievement of that objective can vary significantly from site-to-site, and typically requires different measures than minimum development and building standards entail.

Notably, the IS/MND does not disclose the changes the new draft Safety element would make to the Town’s existing fire prevention policies. Nor does it assess the impact such changes would have on wildfire hazards and risk or explain why the wildfire prevention policies previously adopted in the 2010 Safety element are being replaced with less protective, more permissive development policies.

The district believes that any CEQA analysis of the impact of the Town’s proposed amendments should include an assessment of the impact that the changes in fire prevention policies proposed in the current draft Safety element would have on existing wildfire hazard and risk. The district believes that the elimination of individuated, project-by-project risk assessments for subdivisions in High and Highest Hazard areas, and for projects in Highest Hazard areas, is a step backward that could adversely affect public safety and should be avoided. The requirement for minimal design and construction standards to protect buildings against ignition from vegetative fire is beneficial but alone insufficient to protect communities against the risk of rapid-fire expansion and spread, especially where the density of construction increases the risk of structure-tostructure fire ignition and spread. In such communities, additional mitigation is needed, including adequate separation between structures, dramatic reduction of combustible fuel sources, fire-safe design practices, and greatly enhanced construction standards, materials, and practices.

3. No Assessment of the Impact of Proposed Zoning Code Changes. Portola Valley’s planning department appears to be developing and releasing a still-evolving set of proposed amendments to the Town’s zoning code. The current draft IS/MND does not disclose the specific set of zoning amendments the Town is proposing. Nor does it assess the direct and cumulative impact such zoning code amendments would have on wildfire hazard and risk or evacuation capacity.

An informative and detailed assessment of the impact that proposed zoning code changes would have on existing wildfire hazards and risk requires an informed understanding and assessment of ATTACHMENT 7 Page 247 of 285
7 the way such changes would alter or affect the fuel complexes that can be created within the zoned area. This requires informed consideration of:
a. The location(s) where such changes would apply
b. The minimum required parcel size for each residential structure c. The maximum number of allowable buildings per parcel d. The minimum separation distance between buildings within a parcel e. The maximum allowed building square footage
f. The maximum building height
g. The number of resident and guest vehicles allowed (anticipated) per parcel h. The off and on-street provisions for parking
i. The road widths, staging areas, and emergency vehicle access areas Each of the above zoning provisions forms an important component of the allowable fuel complex that can be built or maintained on affected parcels within a given zoning district. In combination, these provisions, together with the related subdivision and building code provisions for construction in such areas, define the allowable fuel complex that may be built on each parcel of land and, collectively, the fuel complexes that can be created within subdivisions or similarly zoned neighborhoods. By regulating each of these variables in relationship to one another and to the existing hazards of the lands and homes that surround them, it is possible to contain and hopefully mitigate or even prevent the spread and expansion of fire from structure-to-structure, parcel-to-parcel, and neighborhood-to-neighborhood.

An informative and detailed assessment of the cumulative impact of proposed zoning code amendments should be based on all of the zoning code changes to be made and should identify all of the mitigation measures needed to alleviate the effects of increased zoning density.

That, in turn, will require consideration of much additional information not contained in the IS/MND. It is possible, however, to identify some of the important fire hazard and risk implications of increased zoning density within WUI communities such as Portola Valley. It is also possible to identify some of the important principles for effective mitigation of the incremental risk created by increased building density.

Where highly combustible structures such as wood framed buildings are situated near one another, the hazard of structure-to-structure ignition and resultant fire spread from radiant and convective heat flux can increase dramatically. As Cal Fire, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and the insurance industry’s Institute of Business and Home Safety have all recently explained in detail, no amount of home hardening through the adoption of ember resistant features such as non-combustible siding, roofing, or cladding can protect such structures against ignition and structure-to-structure fire spread when they or other highly combustible structures are exposed to other burning structures that are less than 25 feet away. WUI Structure, Parcel, ATTACHMENT 7 Page 248 of 285
8 Community Fire Hazard Mitigation Methodology, NIST TN 2205 (2022). That is why Cal Fire’s minimum fire safe development regulations (14 C.C.R. 1206.1) call for 30-foot property line setbacks for all buildings in Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones and the National Fire Protection Association’s Wildland Fire Protection Standard 1140 calls for 30 feet of separation between all buildings in WUI lands (Standard 12.2).

To appreciate the critical need for adequate separation between such combustible structures, it is important to understand the immense concentration of combustible energy contained within a typical wood framed residential structure, the magnitude of energy that can be released from combustion of such structures (the “enthalpy” of the structure), and the enormous difference between the heat flux measured in both peak intensity and duration of energy released by a burning wood framed structure and the energy released by burning vegetative fuels.

A wood framed residential structure can release thermal energy upon combustion that is hundreds to thousands of times greater than the energy released by burning vegetative fuels.

And the duration of such high energy release from structural fires can be sustained for time periods that are 50 to 100 times longer than the energy released from combustion of vegetative fuels.

The comparatively high enthalpy of burning structures can cause radiant and convective thermal fluxes that are much more intense and prolonged than the radiant and convective fluxes produced by vegetative fires. This is what makes the combustion of structures so potentially dangerous, and the concentration of structural fuels in ever denser clusters or groupings without adequate separation between them even more dangerous.

To appreciate the critical importance of adequate separation between structures, just consider how the dense aggregation of structures on ever smaller parcels with ever less separation between structures on each parcel increases and concentrates the magnitude of energy potentially released if those structures are exposed to structure-to-structure ignition and fire spread. The illustration on the left below shows the limited concentration of enthalpy when two wood framed structures are separated from one another by at least 50 feet. The illustration on the right below shows the much more intense concentration of enthalpies when wood framed structures are separated from one another by less than 25 feet.
0 500
1000
Vegetative
Fuels
Structural
Fuels
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 249 of 285
9 In circumstances such as those depicted above, the magnitude of radiant and convective heat flux from a single burning structure is so intense and so prolonged that no amount of protective noncombustible cladding or roofing can protect the underlying wood framing and interior fuels of closely spaced neighboring structures from also quickly igniting and rapidly spreading fire from structure-to-structure creating an urban conflagration. In the situation depicted on the left, the greater separation between structures provides protection against structure-to-structure ignition through radiant and convective flux. In the situation depicted on the right, the separation between structures is insufficient to protect any structure against ignition by a neighboring structure. In such circumstances, the hazard of rapid structure-to-structure ignition and spread can prove catastrophic. That is the lesson we must all understand and apply from California’s most destructive residential fires, from Coffey Park to Paradise.

While adequate separation of structures is the most effective and prudent safeguard against structure-to-structure fire spread among combustible, wood framed buildings, it is not the only means by which structures can be built in closer proximity to one another. Another alternative for increased density of structures is to reduce the enthalpy of the structures by utilizing noncombustible materials other than wood or other combustibles to frame and build the houses we live in. By utilizing thoroughly non-combustible materials and methods for the entire framing of wall and roof assemblies rather than wood, it is possible to reduce the enthalpy of each structure and thus the requisite distance required to safely separate them from one another to prevent structure-to-structure ignition and spread.

The following graphic illustrates the potential reduction of enthalpy that can be achieved by using entirely non-combustible materials for wall and roof assemblies instead of wood. In the illustration on the left below, densely spaced structures framed in wood have highly concentrated enthalpies. In the illustration on the right, the concentration of enthalpies can be greatly reduced by using only non-combustible wall and roof assemblies to frame and build closely spaced structures.
0 200
400
600
800
1000
50 foot separation
0 200
400
600
800
15 foot separation
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 250 of 285
10 By dramatically reducing the potential energy release of each structure through completely noncombustible wall and roof assemblies, it may be possible to reduce the distances required for safe separation of residential structures and thus increase the density of such structures.

Use of non-combustible materials for roof and wall assemblies are just two of the mitigation steps that should be taken when it is otherwise not possible to achieve adequate separation between parcels and structures. Other important mitigation steps include:
• Thickened wall assemblies to reduce the conduction of heat between exterior and interior spaces
• Layout and design of building clusters to maximize the separation between structures, offset closely spaced wall surfaces, and avoid closely spaced parallel wall surfaces • Construction of non-combustible privacy walls between parcels to shield exposed structures from neighboring structures and vehicles
• Elimination of exterior apertures such as doors, windows, or large vents from closely spaced wall surfaces
• Use of heat hardened window and door assemblies with heat resistant glazing • Provision of non-combustible door and window screens to shield apertures against heat penetration
• Provision of adequate on-street parking to ensure simultaneous access and egress notwithstanding resident and guest parking
• Provision of suitable space and facilities for emergency access and staging as well as shelter in place for occupants
It is also possible to identify some of the more important mitigation measures needed to alleviate the adverse impacts of likely increases in residential density on wildfire hazard and risk. In particular, the district believes that certain specific zoning code amendments to protect against structure-to-structure and neighborhood-to-neighborhood fire spread should be adopted and implemented before any amendments that increase structural density and fuel loading are 0 200
400
600
800
15 foot separation
0 100
15 foot separation
Wood Framing Non-Combustible Framing
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 251 of 285
11 adopted. I address below some of the more important mitigation measures that should be adopted.

4. Assessment of Cumulative Impacts on Evacuation Capacity. Both the draft Safety element and the IS/MND overlook the direct and cumulative impacts of the Town’s proposed General Plan and Municipal Code amendments on the Town’s evacuation capacity and preparation.

As noted above, rapid expansion and spread of fire poses a severe risk to populations and structures surrounding hazardous fuel complexes. That is especially true in communities like Portola Valley where vertiginous terrain, abundant natural and man-made fuel sources, and constrained evacuation routes pose difficult challenges to effective, safe evacuation under urgent, rapidly changing conditions.

Such conditions make it particularly important to carefully assess the direct impact that the location and hazard of the fuel complexes created by new development will have on the existing fire hazards and risks that actually surround them, and the cumulative impact such aggregated hazards and risk will have on existing evacuation capacity and preparation.

By substituting the 2008 Cal Fire map for the Safety element’s existing assessment of wildfire hazard and risk throughout Town, both the draft Safety element and the IS/MND understate and mischaracterize the severity and extent of wildfire hazards and risk, the impact that development can have on such hazards and risk, and especially the impact that development can have on the extent, urgency, and possibility of effective evacuation of populations within areas surrounding areas of new, concentrated development.

While the draft Safety element purports to identify areas of Town with elevated risk of relatively frequent repeated incidents of fire, and areas of Town with constrained routes of evacuation access and egress, it does so in the context of a depiction of wildfire hazard and risk (the 2008 Cal Fire map) that mischaracterizes the actual extent of severe fire hazard. As noted above, the 2008 Cal Fire map on which the draft Safety element and IS/MND rely depicts 6% of Portola Valley as Very High Fire Hazard Severity and 0% as High Hazard. That is not a correct assessment of the fire hazards the Town confronts, or the cumulative impact of those hazards on evacuation capacity and preparedness.

In actuality, the extent and severity of fire hazard within Town is far greater than the 2008 Cal Fire map depicts, and the risk such elevated hazards pose to the population of Town and its surrounding areas is much greater and more immediate than the draft Safety element or IS/MND recognize or assess. Neither the draft Safety element nor the IS/MND provide an informed, competent assessment of the direct and cumulative impacts that the Town’s proposed amendments would have on such hazards and risk, or the steps that can and should be taken to mitigate such impacts to protect public safety in the event of a wildfire emergency.

For present purposes, the assessment of the direct and cumulative impacts of the Town’s proposed General Plan and Municipal Code amendments on existing evacuation capacity and preparation should be based on the fire hazard assessment depicted in the Moritz map, as well as the expected fire return interval and the existing evacuation capacity. That assessment should then be promptly updated once the district’s new hazard and risk assessment becomes available.

5. Assessment of Cumulative Impact on Fire Protection Services and Infrastructure. The reason high density development on fire-prone WUI lands can increase wildfire risk is due not ATTACHMENT 7 Page 252 of 285
12 only to the severe hazard and potential risk of wildland fire, but also to the risk that any fire in a densely developed WUI setting poses for structure-to-structure ignitions and fire spread. Such ignitions can rapidly cause an uncontrolled conflagration. In other words, it is the density and nature of the built environment within a hazardous WUI setting, not just the wildlands alone, that cause both increased fire hazard and increased fire risk in communities with dense development.

In such settings, the risk of home ignition and structure-to-structure fire spread depends on two dominant sources of ignition: 1) embers lofted by fire, and 2) radiant or convective heat emitted from nearby fire.

In WUI communities, virtually every structure is exposed to the hazard of potential ignition by embers and should be hardened against such exposures.

But not all structures are necessarily exposed to the hazard of potential ignition by radiant or convective flux. In general, only those structures whose proximity to neighboring fuel sources or whose combustible construction renders the structure susceptible to ignition from radiant or convective flux are at increased risk of ignition. The greater the proximity of any structure to any other structure, or to any other concentrated fuel source, the greater the need for noncombustible methods and materials of construction. In short, we can greatly reduce the hazard and the risk of structure-to-structure ignition and fire spread, but only by adequately separating the structures we build, or by building them to resist ignition from intense radiant and convective flux.

Thus, zoning changes that result in high structural density should be preceded and anticipated by commensurate fire code amendments that
• mandate enhanced non-combustible construction methods, materials, and design, • limit exposures to flammable materials,
• mandate effective resistance to ignition caused by radiant and convective flux as well as burning embers, and
• mandate resistance to fire spread.

High-density development can also significantly complicate firefighting effectiveness and safety. The rapid expansion and intense heat of dense structural fires necessitates enhanced safety measures to protect firefighters and specialized equipment (such as expensive aerial units) to limit adjacent structure ignition and fire spread. Such measures and equipment require enhanced access and set up space that too often is ignored in development plans.

Here again, zoning changes that result in high structural density should be preceded and anticipated by a commensurate enhancement in structure fire procedures as well as increased training and capability.

6. Consideration of Necessary and Appropriate Mitigation Measures. The IS/MND inexplicably concludes that the proposed relaxation of existing land use and development safeguards, dramatic increase in the number of development projects and density of residential structures, large expansion in the population of the Town and increase in vehicles, and large increase in the intensity of land use and human activity in and around areas of very high and high fire hazard severity, have no significant impact on wildfire hazard and risk. On that basis, it then concludes that no mitigation measures are required to alleviate impacts on wildfire hazard and risk.

ATTACHMENT 7 Page 253 of 285
13 As noted above, the IS/MND is based on an erroneous characterization of the existing wildfire hazards and risks in Portola Valley, in conflict with maps adopted in the 2010 Safety Element and provides no competent assessment of the impacts that the Town’s proposed amendments would have on the documented wildfire hazards and risks that exist throughout the Town. Nor does it assess how the changes reflected in its proposed amendments would interact to cumulatively impact wildfire hazard and risk over time.

Until a competent CEQA assessment of the impacts of the proposed amendments is completed, it is premature to discuss specific mitigations that can and should be taken to alleviate the direct and cumulative impacts on risks. It is however, possible to identify some of the steps the Town can and should take immediately to implement its long-standing General Plan fire prevention policies and safeguard the town, its residents and those surrounding it against existing wildfire hazard and risk.

The findings, policies and objectives outlined in the 2010 Safety element provide a roadmap for the Town’s adoption and codification of ordinances in its Municipal Code that can serve to protect the community and its residents against extreme wildfire hazard and risk. For example:
• Adoption and codification of the High and Highest Hazard areas identified in the Moritz map as High and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in accordance with Government Code §51179. Such designations should be updated as and when the district’s updated assessment of wildfire hazard and risk is completed and released. • Codification of the fire prevention policies of the 2010 Safety element regarding development in High and Highest Hazard areas identified in the Moritz map or any successor map approved by the district and Town
Further steps the Town should consider taking to mitigate its existing wildfire hazards and risk include:
• Adoption and codification of the individuated wildfire risk assessment and abatement procedures and standards of NFPA Standard 1140 §§ 10.1 thru 26.2.6, designating the Woodside Fire Protection District as the authority having jurisdiction under NFPA 1140 §§10.1-26.2.6 to administer and enforce the standards within the Town’s local jurisdiction. • Adoption and codification of Cal Fire’s minimum fire safe development regulations (14 C.C.R. 1270.01 thru 1276.05) throughout all High and Highest Hazard areas identified in the Moritz map or any successor map approved by the district and the Town, and designation of the Woodside Fire Protection District as the authority having jurisdiction under the regulations to administer and enforce their requirements within the Town’s local jurisdiction.
• Adoption and codification of a new Town ordinance establishing o minimum property line setbacks of 30 feet for all new parcels and all new residential development within all High and Highest Hazard areas identified in the Moritz map or any successor map approved by the district and the Town o minimum separation distance of 30 feet between all newly developed structures within a parcel in all High and Highest Hazard areas identified in the Moritz map or any successor map approved by the district and the Town ATTACHMENT 7 Page 254 of 285
14 o provisions for reduction of required setbacks or separation distances where physically infeasible provided alternate means are demonstrated and provided to achieve the same fire risk reduction benefit that the required set-back or separation distance would achieve, such as reduction of structure enthalpy through use of noncombustible wall and roof assemblies; elimination of exposed windows and doors from closely spaced surfaces; installation of non-combustible walls between parcels and exposed structures.
• Adoption and codification of a new Town ordinance to establish the procedures and standards by which the Town shall review and determine the impact of proposed development projects on public health and safety in accordance with the provisions of the following State housing law mandates:
o Government Code §§ 65589.5(d)(2) (“a local agency shall not disapprove a housing development project … unless it makes written findings, based upon a preponderance of the evidence in the record [that] … [t]he housing development project ... as proposed would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to lowand moderate-income households”), o Government Code § 65852.2(a)(1)(A) (relating to accessory dwelling units), o Government Code § 66411.7(d) (relating to SB-9 urban lot splits), and o Government Code §§ 65913.4(a)(6)(D) and 65915(e)(1) (relating to bonus density concessions).

Based on its review of the draft Safety element and current IS/MND, the district believes that a thorough and competent environmental impact review (EIR) is needed to assess fully and carefully the direct and cumulative impacts of the Town’s proposed General Plan and Municipal Code amendments on wildfire hazards and risks within the Town and its surrounding environments. The review should include all relevant public safety impacts, including impacts on evacuation capacity and preparedness, emergency response capabilities and preparedness, as well as the mitigation measures needed to alleviate and address such impacts.

The district would welcome the opportunity to work closely with the Town to effectuate that review and to develop and implement an appropriate, comprehensive set of mitigations to help the Town achieve its housing objectives and policies in a manner consistent with public safety.

Sincerely,
Don Bullard
Fire Marshal
Woodside Fire Protection District
Office – 650-851-6206
Email- [email protected]

ATTACHMENT 7 Page 255 of 285
Woodside Fire Protection District recommended safety measures, transmitted to the Town of Portola Valley, March 29, 2023 ATTACHMENT 7 Page 256 of 285
WFPD’s Requested Mitigations

1. Adoption and codification by ordinance of the High and Highest Hazard areas identified in the Moritz map as High and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in accordance with Government Code §51179 and WFPD’s newly proposed WUI Ordinance 22-02. Such hazard zone designations should be updated as and when the district's updated assessment of wildfire hazard and risk is completed and released.

2. Codification by ordinance of the fire prevention policies in section 4151 of the 2010 Safety element regarding development in High and Highest Hazard areas identified in the Moritz map or any successor map approved by the district and Town.

3. Adoption and codification by ordinance of Cal Fire's minimum fire safe development regulations (14 C.C.R. §§ 1270.01 thru 1276.05) throughout all High and Highest Hazard areas identified in the Moritz map or any successor map approved by the district and Town, and designation of the Woodside Fire Protection District as the authority having jurisdiction under the Cal Fire regulations to administer and enforce their requirements within the Town's local jurisdiction.

4. Adoption and codification of a new Town ordinance amending Cal Fire’s minimum fire safe development regulations, as adopted above, to require. • minimum property line setbacks of 30 feet for all new parcels and all new residential development within all High and Highest Hazard areas identified in the Moritz map or any successor map approved by the district and Town. • minimum building separation distance of 30 feet between all newly developed structures within a parcel in all High and Highest Hazard areas identified in the Moritz map or any successor map approved by the district and the Town, and • provisions for reduction of required setbacks and/or separation distances upon prior written district approval if (a) compliance is shown to be physically infeasible and (b) alternate means satisfactory to the district are demonstrated and implemented to achieve the same reduction of fire spread risk that the required set-back or separation distance would achieve. Such alternate means include but are not limited to the reduction of structure enthalpy through use of noncombustible wall and roof assemblies; elimination of exposed windows, doors, or apertures from closely spaced surfaces; installation of non-combustible fire walls between parcels and exposed structures.

5. Adoption and codification of a new Town ordinance to establish the procedures and standards by which the Town shall review and determine the impact of proposed development projects on public health and safety in accordance with the provisions of the following State housing law mandates:
• Government Code §§ 65589.5(d)(2) ("a local agency shall not disapprove a housing development project ... unless it makes written findings, based upon a preponderance of the evidence in the record [that] ... [t]he housing development project ... as proposed would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low and moderate-income households"),
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 257 of 285
• Government Code § 65852.2(a)(1)(A) (relating to accessory dwelling units), • Government Code § 66411.7(d) (relating to SB-9 urban lot splits), and • Government Code §§ 65913.4(a)(6)(D) and 65915(e)(1) (relating to bonus density concessions)

6. Complete and adopt Town-wide Emergency Evacuation and Recovery Plan for wildfire, earthquake and similar town-wide emergencies, and staff and fund Town program to educate residents and implement the plan.

7. Update and amend the General Plan Safety element to
• Update and amend assessment of the environmental impact of planned development on wildfire risk and public safety once the Fire District’s hazard and risk assessment is completed.
• Expand and improve existing evacuation routes.
• Enhance Zoning, Subdivision and Building Codes to mitigate risk of fire spread between and among combustible structures and vehicles that lack adequate separation.
• Enhance safety and reliability of power and communications utilities. • Adopt and codify by ordinance the individuated wildfire risk assessment and abatement procedures and standards of NFPA Standard 1140 §§ 10.1 thru

26.2.6, designating the Woodside Fire Protection District as the authority having jurisdiction to administer and enforce NFPA 1140 within Town ATTACHMENT 7 Page 258 of 285
April 18, 2008 memo by the Town Planner George Mader
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 259 of 285
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 260 of 285
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 261 of 285
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 262 of 285
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 263 of 285
Woodside Fire Protection District Sept 18, 2022 letter to Town of Portola Valley
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 264 of 285
Woodside Fire Protection District
Fire Prevention Bureau
808 Portola Road Portola Valley, Ca. 94028
(650) 851-1594
www.woodsidefire.org
Don Bullard – Fire Marshal

To: Laura Russel, Planning Director, Town of Portola Valley From: Don Bullard, Fire Marshal, Woodside Fire Protection District Re: Safety Element Review
Date: September 13, 2022
Dear Laura,
Overall, the safety element update looks good. There are some additional comments I would like to have considered:

Fire Severity Maps
“The district does not approve of or support the use of the limited CalFire map from 2008 as it is too old and too limited based on our assessments. You may recall that the district rejected this map as too limited even back in 2008. It is not a safe and accurate map to approve in 2022 either.” Matt Miller, WFPD Board President (January 20, 2022).

Multi Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan
The district does not agree with the FEMA Hazard and Risk Ranking given for Wildfire for the 2021 MJLHMP for Portola Valley. The district feels that the Town should update the wildfire ranking to be more in alignment with the Fire District and the Town of Woodside. Both the Fire District and the Town of Woodside have ranked wildfire of the highest hazard where Portola Valley has it ranked as medium to almost low hazard. The Town of Portola Valley should update their MJLHMP as soon as possible to reflect the true wildfire hazards faced by the Town.

Minimize Risks to Existing and New Land Use
Existing Development
Policy Increase resilience of existing development in high-risk areas built prior to modern fire safety codes or wildfire hazard mitigation guidance. Create a track to increase resilience of existing development.

Policy Ensure that public and private landowners for all existing land uses comply with all applicable state ATTACHMENT 7Page 4

Page 265 of 285 ends

and local requirements and implement site-specific safety measures that mitigate to a low risk condition around or near public facilities, infrastructure, and natural resources.

Policy Use public and private funding, where available, to the greatest extent practical to assist private landowners in implementing defensible space and building retrofits to achieve a low-risk condition.

Policy Ensure public and private landowners minimize the risk of wildfire moving from wildland areas to developed properties, or from property to property, by increasing structural hardening measures (e.g., fire-rated roofing and fire-resistant construction materials and techniques), maintaining and improving defensible space on site, and supporting vegetation management in adjacent undeveloped areas.

Policy Publicly disclose development locations without sufficient emergency route access or capacity.

Program Develop a comprehensive WUI risk reduction program and associated funding/financing for Existing development to improve defensible space, increase home and structural hardening, and increase vegetation and fuels management in wildland areas adjacent to existing development.

Infill Development
Policy Require all infill development projects within the SRA or VHFHSZ to comply with all applicable state or local fire safety and defensible space regulations or standards, and any applicable fire protection or risk reduction measures identified in locally adopted plans.

Policy Discretionary infill projects may be required to prepare a project-specific fire hazard and risk assessment and incorporate project-specific risk reduction measures, subject to the determination and approval of the local agency.

Program Develop streamlined wildfire risk assessment and mitigation procedures for infill projects in the SRA and VHFHSZ.

Program Conduct a feasibility study for a TDR program that identifies undeveloped wildland areas within High or very high FHSZ’s or subject to extreme threat as “sending areas” and areas outside of FHSZ’s or high fire threat areas as “receiving areas”.
(https://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/app/legacy/documents/transfer-development-rights-policytoolkit.pdf) New Growth
Policy Avoid significant expansion of new development, critical facilities, and infrastructure in areas subject to extreme threat or high risk, such as High or Very High FHSZ’s or areas classified by CalFire as having an extreme threat classification on Fire threat maps, unless all feasible risk reduction measures have been incorporated into project designs or conditions of approval.

Policy Encourage the use of conservation easements or establish a TDR program in undeveloped wildland areas within high fire hazard severity zones.

ATTACHMENT 7Page 5

Page 266 of 285 ends

Policy Plan and construct urban development to resist the encroachment of uncontrolled wildfires from adjacent WUI or wildland areas.

Program Update local zoning and subdivision codes to designate wildfire hazard overlay zones and associated conditional use, site development standards, and design criteria to mitigate wildfire hazards and reduce risks to new development within the overlay zones.

Program Update local code and ordinances to require preparation of a project -specific fire protection plan (FPP) for all new development projects in high fire hazard severity zones and require that such Projects incorporate all recommended risk reduction measures from the FPP into project designs or conditions of approval.

Fuel Modification and Land Management
General Considerations
Policy Coordinate with Cal Fire, local fire agencies, Fire Safe Councils, private landowners, and other responsible agencies to identify the best method(s) of fuel modification to reduce the severity of future wildfires, including:
• Prescribed fire
• Forest thinning
• Grazing
• Mechanical clearing
• Hand clearing (piling, burning/chipping)
• Education/outreach
• Defensible space
Program Create a special assessment district to fund and maintain a fuel modification program to reduce wildfire risk.

Program Develop a local program to identify, prioritize, and fund fuel modification projects in the Local Responsibility Area, and leverage the California Vegetation Treatment Program (CalVTP) and Program EIR for eligible projects in the State Responsibility Area.

Defensible Space
Policy Prioritize public and private funding for fire risk hazard reduction to assist private landowners in implementing safety measures to achieve a low-risk condition.

Wildland Considerations
Policy Monitor plant communities in wildland areas over time for changes in potential fire hazard severity or risks. (Including Town owned properties).

ATTACHMENT 7Page 6

Page 267 of 285 ends

Urban Considerations
Policy Prepare a site-specific fuel modification plan prior to the construction of any structure, whether residential, recreational, or commercial. The location and development of any road, or any other man-made structure that may act as a fuel barrier, will be done in consideration of its maximum benefit as a fuel barrier/fire break. The plan will cover the entire parcel and include measures for modifying fuel loading prior to development and a plan to maintain that protection over time.

Policy Maintain open spaces and urban forests so that ground fuels do not promote the spread of wildfire And aerial fuels do not allow the spread of a fire through the tree canopy.

Policy Use public open spaces as demonstration areas and examples to neighborhood residents for fire- Adapted landscapes.

Policy Update site landscaping standards to be fire-adapted using native vegetation or fire-resistant planting palettes and prohibit flammable landscaping plantings or materials storage within the structure ignition zone (e.g., within the 0-5 feet of the structure).

Policy Develop a comprehensive vegetation management and weed-abatement program for open-space areas, including those that are in or adjacent to existing subdivisions and new development areas.

Program Develop a program to reduce highly flammable invasive species that have a low drought tolerance And easily spread without intentional propagation.

Protecting Public Health and Safety
Disaster Preparedness activities
Policy Ensure completeness and availability of identified emergency supplies and resources to all segments of the population, focusing especially on vulnerable and disadvantaged communities, including temporary shelter or housing, and items such as medical supplies and services, generators, pumps, sandbags, road clearing, and communication facilities.

Policy Maintain and improve disaster response and recovery capabilities to protect and meet the needs of all members of the community, especially the most vulnerable and disadvantaged.

Program Update existing emergency preparedness and response plans and conduct community-facing exercises to enhance disaster preparedness and build local capacity to better address and mitigate health and safety impacts resulting from wildfires.

Program Engage with Firewise USA, Fire Safe Councils, and other networking organizations to improve local and regional coordination when addressing wildfire risks.

ATTACHMENT 7Page 7

Page 268 of 285 ends

Public Education and Financial Assistance
Program Identify or develop programs to provide financial incentives or assistance to low-income households for defensible space maintenance, home hardening, and other measures to reduce risk.

Disaster Response, Recovery, and Maintenance
Wildfire Response
Policy Identify low risk fire safety areas, including locations that may serve as temporary shelter or refuge areas during wildfire events.

Program Develop and adopt coordinated emergency notification and evacuation procedures that may be required across jurisdictional boundaries under extreme wildfire event scenarios.

Program Review and update emergency response and evacuation plans and procedures at least every 5 years to reflect current conditions and community needs.

Long-Term Considerations
Policy Periodically review trends and projections of future fire risk and fire risk reduction capabilities to ensure that mitigation measures are adequate.

Policy Incorporate forecasted impacts from climate change into trends and projections of future fire risk and consideration of policies to address identified risk.

Policy Require defensible space maintenance agreements for new development projects and require extension of defensible space maintenance agreements to subsequent landowners.

Program Periodically review fire history and lessons learned to ensure that hazard mitigation measures and future disaster recovery needs are being managed to optimize effectiveness.

Program Using best available data and tools, update the fire hazard and risk assessment regularly to account for climate change or other factors, and alert public and private landowners in future high-risk areas regarding changes in hazard severity or risk levels.

CPAW SAFETY ELEMENT UPDATE COMMENTS
Laura,
Regarding the Safety Element update, there are some additional comments we would like to have considered:

1. Include the importance that all outreach and educational material be available in Spanish for the Latino community in the area. When discussing solutions and impacts for wildfire preparedness and mitigation it is important to include this growing segment of the population, as the effects of a wildfire can have an equal, if not a greater impact on them.

ATTACHMENT 7Page 8

Page 269 of 285 ends

2. Under "New Developments", include language that requires a developer to assign all "fuel modification" requirements on common land to the association or other common owner groups. This will guarantee that those requirements will continue with the development once the developer is out of the picture.

3. Possibility including a section on increasing structure setbacks on slopes.

4. Would it be beneficial for this document to include support for a change in the citation process, allowing WFPD the ability to cite on the first violation if so desired? The language would not need to be specific, but any support here may help the fight down the road.

Overall, it looks really good from our end and they seemed to have addressed all of the other concerns we had. It is reassuring to see that many of the recommendations coming out of this group align with the recommendations the CPAW team has flushed out.

Doug
--
Doug Green
Program Manager
Community Planning Assistance for Wildfire (CPAW)
[email protected]

ATTACHMENT 7Page 9

Page 270 of 285 ends

Sincerely,
Don Bullard
Fire Marshal
Woodside Fire Protection District
Office – 650-851-6206
Email- [email protected]
www.woodsidefire.org

ATTACHMENT 7Page 10

Page 271 of 285 ends

ATTACHMENT 7 Page 272 of 285
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 273 of 285
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 274 of 285
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 275 of 285
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 276 of 285
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 277 of 285
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 278 of 285
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 279 of 285
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 280 of 285
ATTACHMENT 7 Page 281 of 285
______________________________________________________________________________________ TO: Mayor and Members of the Town Council
FROM: Sarah Wernikoff
DATE: Wednesday, December 13
, 2023
RE: December 6, 2023 BPTS Meeting
OVERVIEW:

1. Update from Sheriff’s Office (Deputy Patrick Taylor) a. Review of collisions and citations

2. Update from Public Works (Howard Young)
a. Review of upcoming projects: storm prep/road drainage b. Crosswalk timeline - Spring 2024
c. Reminder of Town closure over Holiday week

3. Review, discussion, and amendment of BPTS letter to Hawthorn’s PAWG process

4. Windy Hill parking – no update

5. Safe routes to school subcommittee: Discussion of potential grants

6. Alternative transportation committee – no update

7. Events – no update

8. Matters arising – Need outreach for additional/new BPTS committee members

TOWN OF PORTOLA VALLEY
Liaison Memo

TOWN OF PORTOLA VALLEY

Page 282 of 285 ends

Page 1 ends

______________________________________________________________________________________ TO: Mayor and Members of the Town Council
FROM: Judith Hasko
DATE: January 10, 2024
RE: SFO Roundtable
I attended the 12/6 meeting in Millbrae. They passed a recommendation of the Technical Working Group to support the exploration of the next phase of the GBAS system, discussed some staffing changes, and received a report of the economic impact of SFO. There will be new airlines with new flights in and out of SFO to Taipei and to Toronto. Closure of the 28L runway is on course for renovation starting Jan. 16th and to reopen it in July. This will impact flight times and arrival rates given that one runway will be out of use.

As background I had outreach from Portola Valley residents noticing several instances of increased airport noise in town. I spoke with a representative of the Roundtable, who led me through publicly available resources to identify the flights passing through our area at a given time as well as to see the general conditions applicable in the region at that time. She confirmed that no general changes to flight paths have been implemented that would likely impact the town, but did show me that periodic increased noise may be due to:

1. Changes to flight paths on a case by case or day by day basis to manage traffic and maintain distance between flights given local weather conditions and systemic issues causing flight delays. This will be more typical in the winter, stormy months.

2. Flights at SFO increasing almost to pre-pandemic levels this year. While Asian flights are not quite returned to pre-pandemic levels, overall flights are at 97% of pre-pandemic levels (meaning there are increased numbers of domestic and European flights). In other words, there are simply more flights coming into and out of SFO, after a time of reduced usage.

TOWN OF PORTOLA VALLEY
Committee / Commission Liaison
Report

TOWN OF PORTOLA VALLEY

Page 283 of 285 ends

Page 2 ends

3. Potentially some changes to flight paths as described in point 1 above, but for flights to/from San Jose Minetta Airport. Again, this is not a systemic change but a condition-dependent modification of flight path to areas over Portola Valley.

I will continue to explore any other factors that impact noise over the town and report any additional factors and developments.

If anyone wants to use the publicly available tracking information on flights (current and historical) it can be found at:
https://webtrak.emsbk.com/sfo13
Judith

Page 284 of 285 ends

Page 1 ends

______________________________________________________________________________________ TO: Mayor and Members of the Town Council
FROM: Judith Hasko
DATE: January 10, 2024
RE: Trails and Paths Committee Meeting 12/13/2023 Liaison Report Request for horse crossing signs at 2 sites in town given increased traffic in oral comments. Not discussed.

Conservation committee oral comment - short cut taken by construction workers near DFF, may be moot at this point.

Comment on Hawthorne map for proposed trails. Clarify what is multi use and where bikes can join the system trails.

Town trail map update and commentary - close to final new maps.

Palmer trail - trail moved back to easement area after tree fell, some improvements will be made.

Need to check when committee pulled in on site development permits; they receive only occasional notices and would benefit from input from our new planner to comment on role for committee in site development permits near trails - weighing in earlier is more efficient.

Safe routes to school - what jurisdiction would approve? Issued previously by school district not town although prior map was posted by town. Old map funded by county in relation to school. Who is the right "approval" body? Kari Rust handled the process last time around. National program may be implicated - may need to check our process. Town attorney to be consulted on process and jurisdictions to be involved.

Trail work/budget report. Not a lot of work in November. Questions on Shady trail and Eagle trail. ~ Judith

TOWN OF PORTOLA VALLEY
Committee / Commission Liaison
Report

TOWN OF PORTOLA VALLEY

Page 285 of 285 ends

Portola Valley City CouncilJanuary 10, 2024

Portola Valley City Council
January 10, 2024