|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The regional agency charged with improving flood control around the San Francisquito Creek is backing off a proposal to install floodwalls along the volatile creek after Menlo Park residents and the city’s mayor publicly came out against the contentious feature.
The floodwalls were a key feature of the flood-control project that the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority was considering last month as part of its decades-long effort to protect the cities of Palo Alto, East Palo Alto and Menlo Park from major floods. An analysis that was commissioned by the creek authority and recently completed by the consulting firm WRA included floodwalls as a feature in all four of the alternatives that it presented as part of its analysis.
But in hearing a presentation on the alternatives last month, the floodwalls proposal received pushback from Menlo Park Mayor Drew Combs Combs, who serves on the creek authority board of directors. He noted prior opposition to floodwalls from his constituents and characterized the revival of this option as “history repeating itself.”
“When I see floodwalls being proposed by the JPA, history is repeating itself even though the community has been very clear,” Combs said.
Combs also blamed Palo Alto residents at the creek authority’s May 28 meeting for delaying the project, claiming that the property owners on the Palo Alto side have been “very difficult to deal with as it relates to what the JPA is trying to achieve with this project.” He also took issue with Palo Alto residents who support widening the channel on the San Mateo County side of the creek, which includes Menlo Park, but not on the Santa Clara County side, which includes Palo Alto.
“If we’re talking about the issue of possible floodwalls on the street, the exposure on Woodland is much greater than Palo Alto Avenue,” Combs said, noting that a floodwall on Woodland would involve a lane reduction.
Combs is far from the only resident concerned about the floodwalls. Earlier this month, nearly 60 residents tuned into a webinar hosted by the creek authority to hear about the plans. Several asked about the proposed design of the floodwalls, while some expressed opposition.
Jim Wiley, who lives in the Willows neighborhood in Menlo Park, suggested that the floodwalls would cause “immense and irreversible damage to the environment across the creek” while doing very little to remove residents from the burden of having to purchase flood insurance to comply with FEMA regulations.
“There simply isn’t enough return on investment to justify that kind of expenditure, especially when so few homeowners would see relief from flood insurance premiums,” Wiley wrote in a letter that was read out loud at the June 5 community meeting.
The effort to bolster flood protection kicked off in earnest after a devastating February 1998 storm, which remains the largest on record. The creek authority, which consists of elected officials from Palo Alto, Menlo Park, East Palo Alto, Valley Water and the San Mateo County Flooding and Sea Level Resiliency District, has been evaluating ways to lower the risk ever since. It completed its first major project in 2019, when it reconstructed levees and widened the channel in the vulnerable downstream area near U.S. 101, which includes sections of East Palo Alto.
Its second big project, known as Reach 2, isn’t flowing quite as smoothly. The area got drenched on Dec. 31, 2022, and the San Francisquito Creek overtopped to a greater degree than the creek authority’s hydrological models suggested it would. Given the discrepancy the agency paused its prior plans and commissioned a new study with a fresh set of recommended alternatives.
Other unexpected issues have also muddied the process, as Valley Water flirted earlier this year with the idea of leaving the partnership, a move that would deprive the creek authority of its largest funding partner. And the May 28 meeting exposed another tension, as Combs said that Palo Alto property owners have been “some of the most obstinate individuals to deal with.” Palo Alto City Council member Greer Stone then acknowledged the “charged emotions on all sides” and said he hopes board members “won’t point fingers at any individuals or communities and find a way to work together.”
This week, creek authority Executive Director Margaret Bruce issued a report that greatly scales back the agency’s ambitions when it comes to floodwalls. Noting Combs’ opposition to floodwalls, Bruce said that staff will split the Reach 2 projects into phases. The initial phase would focus on widening the channel in various segments of the creek, removing constructions and replacing an existing wooden floodwall on Woodland Avenue in East Palo Alto.
Bruce also indicated that the authority would explore as part of the first phase other “non-floodwall options” that were not vetted in the recent analysis, including a large bypass tunnel and permanent “passive floodwalls” that “remain unobtrusive until activated by rising water levels,” according to the WRA analysis.
“Once floodwaters approach, these walls either automatically deploy or rely on the natural forces of hydrodynamics to function effectively,” the analysis states.
The first phase will also involve developing a cost-sharing framework for the Reach 2 projects, which aims to protect the cities from creek flow of 7,200 cubic feet per second, the equivalent of the 1998 flood. The project would protect 2,953 parcels in Palo Alto, 1,252 in East Palo Alto and 857 in Menlo Park.
Bruce wrote that the scope of future phases in the Reach 2 project would be determined after the creek authority completes the necessary feasibility studies to evaluate further improvements. It would, however, involve replacing the Pope-Chaucer bridge, a 1940s structure that floods during major storms.
Meanwhile, Palo Alto is moving ahead with replacement of Newell Road bridge, a project that is widely viewed a necessary prerequisite to the Reach 2 work. Located downstream of the Pope-Chaucer, the Newell Road bridge will be widened and designed to accommodate the greater flow that the Reach 2 projects would generate. The City Council approved a contract for the Newell project last week and the city expects to complete it by 2027.
If things go to plan, that is also the year when the creek authority would start constructing the projects in the first phase of Reach 2.
Chez TJ owner wants to call it quits but can’t because of financial worriesOctober 31, 2023 11:46 am
