|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
A new plan to bolster flood control around the San Francisquito Creek spurred fresh hopes and familiar fears on Wednesday afternoon as city leaders and residents vowed to work together to implement the long-awaited but contentious improvements.
The San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority, a regional agency that is charged with taming the volatile creek, presented on Wednesday a new analysis that recommends rebuilding the flood-prone Pope-Chaucer Bridge, widening the channel at various sections and installing floodwalls in select segments on Palo Alto, East Palo Alto and Menlo Park. The agency plans to hold public hearings in the three cities over the next month before moving ahead with further design and, ultimately, construction.
For many residents around the creek, the improvements can’t come soon enough. Some remember the massive flood of February 1998, in which water overtopped bridges and spilled into homes. Many more recall a more recent flood that took place on Dec. 31, 2022, damaging properties around the creek, upending the creek authority’s hydraulic assumptions and prompting the cities to hit a reset button on their improvement plans.
The new plan aims to restart the process. According to an analysis by the firm WRA, if all the elements are implemented, the improvements would protect the areas around the creek from flow levels of 7,200 cubic feet per second, the equivalent of the 1998 flood, the largest on record.
Xenia Hammer, a Palo Alto resident who lives in the flood zone, noted that it’s been nearly 30 years since the 1998 flood and urged authorities to proceed with the planned improvements, which include removing obstructions from the channel. She cited a cement wall near Manhattan Avenue, near the border of East Palo Alto and Menlo Park, that causes water to overtop around Oak Court and Euclid Avenue during major storms.
“The removal of that wall and creek widening is part of this project and it is a prime example that shows how urgent and beneficial this project is to people on the Palo Alto side, Menlo Park, East Palo Alto, San Mateo County and Santa Clara County – to everyone,” Hammer said.
Not everyone, however, is buying into the plan. The prospect of building floodwalls has proven polarizing in the past, with residents on the Palo Alto side voicing opposition and threatening litigation over any proposal that puts up walls on their properties. In Menlo Park, residents have also criticized prior proposals to erect barriers on their streets, potentially at the expense of traffic lanes.
“No one wants a floodwall on Woodland Avenue in Menlo Park, and nobody wants to lose the parklike feel near Pope-Chaucer,” said Alex Striffler-Hernandez, a Menlo Park resident. “The engineers need to solve for quality of life, not just the flood model.”
Despite the dissenting voices, the creek authority found broad consensus on a series of near-term steps in the area known as Reach 2, which extends roughly from U.S. Highway 101 to the Pope-Chaucer bridge between Palo Alto and Menlo Park. These include moving forward with widening and stabilizing the creek, replacing a temporary wooden floodwall near the University Avenue bridge with a permanent structure and developing a framework for funding the overall project, which is projected to cost between $120 million and $170 million, according to the presentation from creek authority staff.
Palo Alto City Council member Greer Stone, who chairs the creek authority board, characterized the new plan as a fresh start for a critical but long-stalled plan to improve flood control.
“One thing that’s very clear is doing nothing is not a solution,” Stone said “Without this project, over 1,500 properties remain at risk in the event of a major flood.
“Climate change is making these major events more frequent, more intense. If we fail to act, we not only risk property damage but we also risk public safety.”
Yet the May 28 meeting also made clear that the proposed improvement would be costly and, in some cases, unpopular. Floodwalls alone are expected to cost about $50 million, according to the agency’s estimate. Depending on the location, the floodwalls could either be permanent barriers or “passive” structures that only go up during storms.
While the plan for floodwalls remains hazy, it is already facing pushback. Menlo Park City Council member Drew Combs, who represents his city on the creek authority board, suggested the latest proposal for floodwalls ignores the opposition that this feature has encountered in the past. The new report suggests about 20,300 linear feet of walls, varying in height from 3 to 5 feet.
“When I see floodwalls proposed by the JPA, history is repeating itself, even though the community has been very clear,” Combs said.
He also took a shot at Palo Alto residents who have been opposing prior flood-control plans, causing significant delays to the effort.
“It’s not just history,” he said. “Even today, a number of Palo Alto property owners are very difficult to deal with as it relates to what the JPA is trying to achieve with this project.”
Palo Alto City Council member Greer Stone acknowledged the historical context but urged his colleagues on the creek authority to refrain from pointing fingers as they evaluate the latest set of options.
“There’s going to be charged emotions on all sides in all communities, I’m hoping we won’t point fingers at any individuals or communities and find a way to work together.”
The new analysis evaluated dozens of potential projects and narrowed them down to four alternatives. Two of them would replace the Pope-Chaucer bridge and two that would retrofit the 1911 span by adding culverts. Aside from the bridge work, the alternatives vary when it comes to channel widening. Two alternatives call for widening on both sides of the channel; two others would limit it to the San Mateo County side.
Creek authority staff is recommending what’s known as Alternative 1, which would replace the bridge and widen the channel on both sides.
The report also evaluated other options that could be implemented in the future to further reduce flood damage, including building detention basins upstream, on Stanford University property.
“Although these actions don’t increase channel capacity directly, it reduces peak flow that reaches downstream during the storm to a more manageable level, reducing risk in the area,” said Denean Ni, project manager for the creek authority.
Editor’s note: The prior version of this story included a list of public meetings that the SFCJPA had scheduled to discuss its project. The agency subsequently cancelled these meetings.
Chez TJ owner wants to call it quits but can’t because of financial worriesOctober 31, 2023 11:46 am
