HomeMy Public PortalAbout2020-05-26 Item 12CITY COUNCILAGENDA REPORT%r-syStItCITY OF MILLBRAE621 Magnolia AvenueMiIIbrae, CA 94030SUBJECT: Letter Response to the California High-Speed Rail 2020 Business Plan.ATTACHMENT: Draft LetterReport No.^^>For Agenda of: May 26, 2020Department: City ManagerOriginator: Thpipas^C. Williams - CityManager ^ ^/Z/Approve/g%^Budget ActionYes:No: XL^/t// ^Finance Review: N/AREPORT TYPE: ACTIONxINFORMATIONALITEM TYPE: CONSENT PUBLIC HEARING EXISTING BUSINESS X NEW BUSINESSRECOMMENDATION:Review draft letter to the California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHRSA) in response to their draft 2020Business Plan and provide direction to staff to revise as appropriate.BACKGROUND:CHSR released their draft 2020 Business Plan on February 12, 2020 and is seeking comments by June 1,2020. Staff has reviewed the business plan and prepared a draft comment letter which is attached.CHSR will have a profound impact on the City ofMillbrae as the only planned stop between SanFrancisco and San Jose will be at the Millbrae Station.Although in the planning phase for many years, CHSR has historically ignored and minimized the issuesand concerns of Millbrae (and other peninsula communities) and the current business plan is aperpetuation of this same behavior. Staff has many concerns related to the CHSRA project, some ofwhich are appropriate to raise in response to their 2020 Business Plan. Other concerns and detailedcomments related to flaws in CHSR's environmental analysis and draft plans are better addressed inresponse to their upcoming Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) and associated preliminarydesign drawings and plans.City staff has recently engaged with CHSR staff as well as the primary landowner, whose approvedproject is most affected by the high-speed rail project. Unfortunately, these efforts have not been asfruitful as City staff had hoped due CHSRA staff ignoring the input of the City and property owner(s) intheir planning, but discussion in ongoing and it is still hoped that a solution that may meet the needs ofall parties can be achieved.In response to the foregoing and as a result of the review of the business plan, staff provides thefollowing overview of the draft comment letter for City Council review, comment, and direction.Page 1 of 2
ANALYSIS:In general, CHSRA's proposed plans at the Millbrae Station are inconsistent and noncompliant with the1998 Millbrae Station Area Specific Plan MSASP) as originally approved and as amended in 2016.Further, CHSRA's plans entirely ignore the presence of a fully approved TOD development project(Millbrae Serra Station) of over 484 residential units and approximately 250,000 sf office, and 30,000 sfof retail uses. During the approval process of the amended 2016 MSASP and its accompanying EIR,neither CHSRA nor any of the other companion transit agencies raised formal substantive objections tothe project or concerns regarding the plans on the west side of the current station. It is this west side ofthe station that CHSRA has proposed a station entrance facility and 280 surface parking spaces that willentirely consume all developable land between the existing station and El Camino Real. This is not anacceptable plan to the City ofMillbrae.Although not addressed or discussed in any detail by CHSRA in the Business Plan, the land use issues,and conflict cannot be left uncommented by the City. The attached draft letter expands upon this ingreater detail and also includes the following points regarding the 2020 Business Plan:The plan is misleading and does not adequately describe the track improvements, new trackways,or configuration as it relates to the City ofMillbrae.The plan does not describe nor identify the impacts to the homes within the "Hemlock Ave" areaoflVIillbrae. ROW acquisition will impact may of the current homes.The plan minimizes the conflicts and issues within Millbrae especially in light of the recentplanning exercise undertaken with the City and developer of the Millbrae Serra Station project.The plan minimizes the EIR process and is optimistic and unrealistic in terms of the projectschedule (to meet Federal budget deadlines), especially in light of anticipated unresolved issuesand impacts.Staff seeks input and comments on the draft response letter such that formal comments can be submittedto CHSR in advance of the June 1, 2020 comment deadline.FISCAL IMPACT:There is no fiscal impact associated with this information itemCOUNCIL ACTION:Provide comment and direction to City staff regarding formal response to CHSR's 2020 Business Plan.Page 2 of 2
^wyis-•!ELJL-ftisCity ofMillbrae621 Magnolia Avenue, Millbrae, CA 94030May 26, 2020REUBEN D. HOLOBERMayorANN SCHNEIDERVice MayorANNE OLIVACouncilmemberGINA PAPANCouncilmemberWAYNEJ.LEECouncilmemberTom Richards,Vice Chair California PIigh-Speed Rail Authority770 L Street, Suite 620 Sacramento, CA 95814RE: California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) 2020 Draft Business PlanDear Mr. Richards:The City of Millbrae (City) has reviewed the California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA)2020 Draft Business Plan and provides below specific comments and serious objections on theprovisions of the Plan that pertain to Millbrae. Given the exceptionally detrimental impacts theHigh-Speed Rail project will have upon the City if it's constructed as presently contemplated, theCity must speak out on a number of major issues. CHSRA's singular proposal to construct anunnecessary surface level parking lot would critically devastate the economic viability ofMillbraeand destroy both existing and approved housing desperately needed in this region.BACKGROUNDWhen Millbrae consented to the construction of the Millbrae BART Station (Station) in the late1990's, which is now the largest multi-modal station west of the Mississippi, it was with the explicitunderstanding that Millbrae would be able to develop the area on the west side of the station. Theprospect of this development was an economic inducement for Millbrae to accept the burdens theBART station would bring, not the least of which was the significantly higher traffic that wouldbe generated on Millbrae Avenue and El Camino Real.In conformance with good planning practice, the City adopted the "Millbrae Station Area SpecificPlan" (MSASP) in 1998, a forward-thinking planning document that allowed for high densitytransit-oriented development (TOD) in the area adjacent to the Station. The City updated theMSASP in 2016 to add even higher densities in close proximity to the Station. Through significantcollaboration and input from the regional transit providers, the adopted MSASP also contemplatedthe station access needs of BART, Caltrain, SamTrans, private shuttles, and a future High SpeedRail station.During the extensive public review process for the 2016 Millbrae Station Area Specific Planupdate, CHSRA, like BART and Caltrain, was informed of the design, uses, and impacts of therevised MSASP. A vital linchpin of the MSASP has always been the relocation and extension ofCalifornia Drive to reroute north- and southbound vehicular traffic from the intersection ofMillbrae Avenue and El Camino Real onto California Drive, which is located just west of thetracks in the Station area. This feature, which was prominently featured in both the 1998 and 2016MSASP, was intended to provide station access as preferred by the transit agencies and to mitigatethe traffic impacts from both the Station and the planned economic development on the west sideof the Station. CHSRA voiced nn nhiection to the undated nlans for California Drive.City CounciI/City Manager/City Clerk(650) 259-2334Fire(650) 558-7600Building Division/Permits(650) 259-2330Police(650) 259-2300Community Development(650) 259-2341Public Works/Engineering(650) 259-2339Finance(650) 259-2350Recreation(650) 259-236016565462.1
Page 2HIGH SPEED RAIL IN MILLBR4E—A PROJECT GOES OFF THE TRACKSIn 2010, CHSRA proposed a station in Millbrae, using the existing Caltrain rail alignment, withthe intent to directly connect to the existing Caltrain and BART systems and their link to SanFrancisco International Airport (SFO). The CHSRA station originally proposed to Millbrae wasan underground station to maximize the efficiency of the Station site plan and enhance connectivitybetween transit modes. Without any clear explanation or justification, CHSRA staff has sinceannounced that undergrounding the Millbrae CHSRA station and its rail connection, as previouslypresented in 2010, is no longer considered feasible. In addition, the City has since been informedthat the track alignment must be located to the west of the Station, in the area shown in the MSASPas the location of California Drive.The City has yet to be provided with a satisfactory explanation as to why the previously proposedunderground design is not feasible, nor why the alignment could not be located on the east side ofthe BART tracks, where there is a very lightly used BART track. BART has three tracks inMillbrae and only uses two of the existing tracks for transit riders. The third track is currentlyused for storage of trains during off hours, and BART may be willing to relinquish the track at alower cost to CHSRA than would be required to purchase land on the west srde of the stationthrough eminent domain. The rejection of the undergrounding option is troubling to the City, sinceat the same time CHSRA is planning a massive undergrounding as part of the downtown extensionof the project to the Salesforce Transit Center. The original plan to underground the High SpeedRail station in Millbrae is far more feasible than the $4 billion undergrounding CHSRA plans indowntown San Francisco.CHSRA'S PLANNED SURFACE PARKING LOT DESTROYS EXISTING ANDAPPROVED HOUSING NEEDED TO COMPLY WITH STATE-IMPOSED REGIONALHOUSING NEEDSThe initial plans for the Millbrae CHSRA station did not include parking facilities. When CHSRA'sregional director was publicly asked, at two public CHSRA informational hearings prior to thecompletion of the 2016 MSASP, what CHSRA's parking studies showed it needed for its patronparking at the Millbrae Station, the City was told that CHSRA parking needs were to be addressedoffsite, at SFO or at BART. The City was also told CHSRA had no need for designated CHSRAparking in Millbrae.Thus, in light of CHSRA's expressed lack of interest in parking at the Millbrae Station, the Citywas shocked to hear more recently that not only was parking required in Millbrae, but that it wasplanned as a surface parking lot that would eliminate a fully entitled project, the Millbrae SerraStation project (Serra Station), which is located just west of California Drive. Serra Station islocated immediately to the west of the Station and proposes up to 488 units of housing (with 15%below market), 300,000 sf of class A office and 25,000 sf of retail space in its project with fourlevels of underground parking.ICCCC/IC-) 1
Page 3CHSRA's proposed plans are not only in direct conflict with this approved project, they came asa complete surprise to the City. Although it was fully aware the Serra Station project, CHSRAnever made any objection to the project, nor the planned extension and relocation of CaliforniaDrive, during its consideration by the City. On three separate occasions during the City's years-long public hearings on the MSASP update and its environmental review, as well as the year andone half-long review and final approval of the Serra Station Project ending in April of 2018,representatives of CHSRA appeared before the Millbrae Planning Commission and City Counciland stated repeatedly on the record that CHSRA had no problem with the MSASP or with theCity's approval of the west side project as it was designed.In addition, throughout the City's recent public review of the BART development on the east sideof the Millbrae station, the existing transit providers, Caltrain, CHSRA, and SamTrans were allasked if they had any objections to BART'S removal of over 600 parking spaces from the stationand none of them objected. Thus, the suggestion by CHSRA that they now need parking on thewest side of the Millbrae station to offset BART or Caltrain parking is not only disingenuous butcompletely unacceptable.CHSRA's only proposed plan for the Millbrae Station is totally inconsistent with the adoptedMSASP. The plan proposed by CHSRA unjustifiably torpedoes an approved project featuring444+ high-density housing units, 1 5% of which are affordable, in favor of a surface parking lotand railyard that will devastate the local economy, job creation, and, most importantly, sabotagethe City's ability to meet its state-assigned housing goals. The City of Millbrae demands thatCHSRA adhere to its originally envisioned plan that undergrounds the station and rail alignmentin Millbrae, as CHSRA is doing in other jurisdictions, and abandon plans for a surface parking lotthat conflicts with a well-planned transit-oriented development project and other potentialdevelopments that may be considered on the remaining sites.COMMENTS ON 2020 BUSINESS PLANIn addition to the comments above on the project as a whole, please also note the followingcomments on the Draft 2020 Business Plan:Page 80, Table 3.3 - Can CHSRA provide more detail regarding scope and description regardingthe project "Millbrae Station Track Improvement and Car Purchase?" What is the trackimprovement that is planned?Page 81 - The Plan states that CHSRA is sharing track within the Caltrain right-of-way in thesegment between San Francisco and San Jose. This is certainly not the case with regard to the trackand station in Millbrae and the document should clearly indicate that fact. In addition to preventingthe development of the approved Serra Station project, CHSRA's rail alignment also impactsseveral existing homes on Hemlock Avenue, as the proposed right-of-way apparently overlapstheir property lines. This is not acknowledged in the Plan - a hidden consequence which is anunacceptable form of collateral damage.1fi];fi^4fi5 1
Page 4Page 83 - Strategic Right-of-Way Acquisitions - The Plan states that CHSRA will "continue towork with partners in the Millbrae area" and that in light of the approved development at the site,a "joint approach to meet the needs at the site would be desirable." Unfortunately, this positive-sounding goal is not being accomplished. In fact, the statement is undermined by CHSRA'sdecision to proceed with a station design that only shows a surface-level parking lot on the westside development site.In the last 8 months, Serra Station, the developer of that site, has sought to engage with CHSRAstaff to work out just such a "joint approach." In fact, Serra Station has spent over $80,000 inengineering, architect and parking studies to provide CHSRA with over 50 pages of drawings,plans and studies that would preserve the MSASP uses for the City and Serra Station andaccommodate CHSRA's stated future station and track needs. The City has also shown its goodfaith by approving the creation of a parking district in the MSASP to potentially optimize thebenefits for CHSRA, Caltrain, the City and Serra Station. In three meetings with the new regionaldirector and his staff over the past six months, we have been unable to get any affirmativeindication that the solutions we have provided and proposed can be reviewed by CHSRA'sExecutive Board or its Executive Officers. However, after all of this effort, the City was told lastweek by CHSRA's current regional director and his staff that they do not have the authority toendorse or accept any of our plans.Moreover, this is an outrageous position in light of the fact that when the City previously askedCHSRA for an audience with their Executive Board or Executive Officers to show these plans, theCity was told that cannot happen until plans are accepted by the staff. So, the City is now caughtin the perfect bureaucratic Catch-22—no meeting without approved plans, yet no one withauthority to approve the plans. It is difficult not to conclude that CHSRA is merely stonewallingthe City in order to rush through its environmental document containing this ill-conceived designthat completely disregards the State Legislature and Governor's housing objectives and devastatesour City's economic viability.This is particularly galling in light of the fact that the 2020 Business Plan mentions three examples(including properties surrounding the Diridon Station in San Jose) where "strategic right-of-wayprocurement" is being pursued "where development is being planned but additional land is neededfor the rail corridor." Why can't this same approach be pursued at the Millbrae Station? Such anapproach would potentially resolve the issues described above.Page 133 - Phase I Environmental Completion - The Plan states that the all of the Phase IRecords of Decision (RODs) for the High-Speed Rail project must be obtained by December 31,2022 in order to meet Federal grant deadlines. By failing to include a viable environmentalalternative at the Millbrae Station that will permit adjacent development in compliance with theadopted MSASP, CHSRA invites potential litigation and undermines its objective of meeting thisdeadline.16565462.1
Page 5The City also understands that a recent study concludes that the difference in travel time betweenCaltrain and the proposed CHSRA in the San Francisco to San Jose segment is 4 minutes. Wequestion if the benefit of saving 4 minutes by CHSRA is worth the extraordinary cost and negativeimpacts to housing. The City of Millbrae requests this question also be addressed in the 2020Business Plan.CONCLUSIONOn numerous occasions, the City of Millbrae has requested to meet with higher level CHSRAleaders to work together to resolve the conflict between the CHSRA plans and the City's adoptedplanning documents. There are pragmatic, straightforward solutions that could avoid conflicts andprovide mutual benefits to CHSRA, Millbrae, and station-area property owners. CHSRA staffcharged with managing the San Francisco to San Jose segment has refused to hear our voices,address our concerns, and honor our request to meet with the members of the CHSRA Board.Through this letter we are making that request once again.The City ofMillbrae is requesting that alternatives to CHSRA's only stated project alternative inMillbrae be more than the cursory consideration they have received to date. We believe that, inCHSRA staffs zeal to complete the environmental document expeditiously, unacceptable errorsin judgment are being made that will have severe and detrimental impacts on all affected parties.As stated above, the current path that CHSRA is pursuing directly contradicts important policiesarticulated by the State Legislature and Governor with regard to the delivery of high density,transit-oriented development to help meet our state's housing crisis. We respectfully request youconsider station alternatives that can achieve these shared goals and incorporate them into the 2020Business Plan and Environment Impact Report currently being prepared for the San Jose to SanFrancisco segment.Sincerely,Reuben D. Holober, MayorAnn Schneider, Vice MayorAnne E. Oliva, CouncilmemberGina Papan, CouncilmemberWayne J. Lee, Councilmemberec: Congresswoman Jackie SpeierSenator Jerry HillAssembly Member Kevin MullinSupervisor Dave PineSAMCEDA President and CEO Rosanne FoustMetropolitan Transportation Commission Chair Scott Haggerty1Ct:CI:/IC^ 1