November 28, 2023 Council Transportation Committee

Video

Agenda

• 3. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC - None (00:00:14)
• 5. NEW BUSINESS (00:00:14)
• 5.1 Transit Center (Castro Street) Grade Separation and Access Project, Project 21-35 - Project Scope and Funding Options: Public Works Director Cameron provided an introduction to the Transit Center (Castro Street) Grade Separation and Access Project, Project 21-35 – Project Scope and Funding Options presentation. (00:00:14)
• 5.2 Transit Center (Castro Street) Grade Separation and Access Project, Project 21-35 - Public Art: Senior Civil Engineer Houghton provided a presentation on the Transit Center (Castro Street) Grade Separation and Access Project, Project 21-35 – Public Art. (01:36:07)
• 5.3 Speed Limit Legislation Overview and Implementation Strategy: Senior Traffic Engineer Ochoa provided a presentation on Speed Limit Legislation (Assembly Bill 43, Assembly Bill 1938) and the Implementation Strategy. (02:17:25)
• 6. COMMITTEE/STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS, UPDATES, REQUESTS, AND COMMITTEE REPORTS (02:55:20)
• 6.1 Staff Comments: Public Works Director Cameron provided an update on the interim Castro Street Pedestrian Mall. The Visual Arts Committee will meet in January 2024 to consider decorative design treatments for the central walkway. (02:55:20)
• 6.2 Committee Comments: There were no Committee comments. There were no public speakers in-person or virtually. (02:58:26)
• 7. ADJOURNMENT: At 9:34 p.m., Chair Kamei adjourned the meeting. (02:58:26)

Transcript

[00:00:00] Public Works Director Cameron: I may suggest that we go back to oral communications, and it doesn't case anybody online wanted to make, uh, communication on something on it tonight's agenda. Okay. So,

5.1 Transit Center (Castro Street) Grade Separation and Access Project, Project 21-35 - Project Scope and Funding Options

[00:00:14] Chair Ellen Kamei: um, given that we had some technological issues, we'll reopen oral communications, um, in case uh, those joining us virtually did not hear. We didn't have anyone in person, but this portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the committee on any matter, not on the agenda, speakers are allowed to speak on any topic for up to 3 minutes during this section. State law prohibits the committee from acting on nonagenda items. Would any member of the public on the line like to provide comment on a non-agenda item? If so, please click the raise and button in Zoom. All right, no hands. Okay. So then I will reclose, uh, item number 3, our oral communications, and I believe item number 4 is completed. So we'll move on to item five, which is new business. Item 5.one is the transit center, Castro Street, grade separation, and access project. Project 21 dash 35. Project, scope, and funding options. Don Cameron public works director will introduce the staff presentation. Thank you, chair,

[00:01:25] Public Works Director Cameron: and committee members. So our purpose tonight with this item is to provide the committee with information on the latest cost estimate for the Transit Center Castle Street grade separation project, and discuss options for addressing a sizable funding gap for the project. Want to provide a little bit of historical context for how we got here tonight and then introduce staff that will be making presentation answering questions. Last November, we did receive a cost estimate from Cal Train's 3rd party estimator that the total project cost, its design and construction would be around 136 million. This was higher than the city's previous process estimate, uh, and it did create a blending gap of about 30 or so 1000000 dollars. And we worked with our partners, BTA and Caltrain and started going after grants. And last spring, When he received a grant notice from the state of 25000000 at that combined with other options the city had. We were a static. We announced that we had a fully funded project. We had to counseled that. We told our community that we basically thought we were there. Well, we would expect some cost rides. We know inflation's been very high, and a supply chain problem. So we always knew there was a pot. It was likely we could go, you know, full of people, award, people cross rise, and we'd work on those strategies. We did not anticipate that a new cost testament based on a 65% design, coming from the construction, general contractor construction manager, literally doubled the previous accounts estimate as routed up to around $271,000. We have spent significant time with Caltrain and the project team over the last couple months reviewing the cost estimates, trying to see where maybe no errors or something was mistaken, that could bring it down, which are not very successful with that. We do realize, and we continue to talk to Caltrain, that there's always opportunities to keep sharpening pencils, looking to see if there's different ways to bring down cost here or there. There are certain fees built into this, or either negotiable. But honestly, when we're dealing with a funding gap of the size that we're now talking about 135 8 million. Where it's picked. you know, because this, as we continue to refine the cost estimate, we don't expect it to make a big difference now in our planting. So then we moved on to our next step, which was, okay, what options can we bring to our city council that could help reduce this contest of it? And we pursued a 3 prong cost reduction strategy, which is in your minimum. You going to hear more about tonight. That time we were still holding out hope. That these cost reductions, we'd be bringing to good significant pose of funding gap and make this abundable project again. Unfortunately, it did not do as much and you would still live with an $80000000 gap. Which then led to having to bring even more options to your intention, the middle, uh, of more significant changes to the project, funding opportunities. Basically, the city now faces some major decisions about the future of this project as well as the rainstorm grade separation project. We are aware, and we ask, you know, What? One thing we all have to be aware of is these projects that just get more expensive as time goes on because of escalation right now. It's safe to assume for every year delay. We're looking at 5 to 10000000 added funding gap for each project. So a couple things. One is, I want to bring to your attention that brings to your grade separation is not on your agenda tonight. So we are not going to be talking specifics about that project. However, what we did put in your report, as can be discussed tonight, is the shared funding sources between the 2 great separations. So we are not asking you to talk about the pros or cons about brainstorm or details about brainstorm at this time. We also want to say, you know, we're very aware that this is a significant issue. These are major decisions. We're bringing these to you and the council in a very short time period. I wish I could say, let's take a lot of time, but we're still dealing with the cost escalation factors. We're not asking the committee to make recommendations to the council because this is a lot of information being brought to you in a very short time period. If you choose to make recommendations today. But mostly, our intention is to listen to your feedback and use it to help staff continue to work on a strategy and recommendation, staff recommendations that would go to council. With that, I would like to introduce Joy Houghton. She is a senior civil engineer and the city's project manager. She'll present the options, but I also want to mention other staff that are here tonight that will also help with your questions. At a Rango assistant, public works director and city engineer, and Robert Gonzalez, principal symp engineer, are here. I believe Jim Lightbody is online. Jim has been the city's consultant on this project since the master plan and was a key lead and put together the preliminary engineering plan. So he has a lot of history and background on the community outreach as well as the development of the concept that we've been working to deliver. Joining us from our partner agencies, from Caltrain in person. We have Andy Robbins, who is the director at Capitol Program Delivery for Caltrain. We also have Lori Lowe, manager of government and community affairs for Caltrain. Online. We have Alvin Piano, the project manager for Caltrain. We have John Min Fung, deputy director for capital program delivery. From BTA online. We have Marcella Renzi, deputy director of Grants Allocation. And we have Jane Shin, the 2016 measure B program manager. So a lot of resources here to bear to help answer your questions. So with that, I would like to turn over joy and she will kind of lead you to the key information that's in your council minimum. Thank you. So

[00:08:20] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: start with some project track, um, the Castro Street Grade Separation Project is the partnership project between Caltrain, serving as the lead agency for design and construction of the project. The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, serving as a funding partner, providing measure B funds, and the city as the project sponsor responsible for ensuring that the project is fully funded. The project is the 1st element of the transit center master plan implementation. It includes elimination of the vehicular access at the railroad crossing, a Castro Street, by rewriting vehicles through the proposed Evelyn Avenue ramp connecting a Shoreline Boulevard. This also includes a bicycle and pedestrian pathway between West Shoreline Boulevard, the west side of Shoreline Boulevard. Um, and also includes construction of underprocessing and vertical circulation for bison pets to facilitate passageway between the north side of Central Expressway and the market Boulevard community. To both the transit center and downtown area, huh? And construction of the Moffat Boulevard improvements, including protected by claims and designation of new areas for pickup and drop off. The final design phase for the project kicked off in July of 2022 and on April 20 In April 2023, staff provided the committee an update on the project, including final design status, project delivery methods, schedule, and funding. The estimated cost of the project at the time was a total of 136 million, including a construction cost of 90000000. This construction cost, again, was developed by Caltray's 3rd party estimator in November of 2022. And the project was generally fully funded due to the recent state SB1 competitive local partnership program grant award of $25000000 towards the project. Since then, major milestones have been completed, including execution of a contract with. DCM WebEck admirers and sons. Serving as the construction manager, general contractor, or CMGC for the preconstruction design. The 65% design place phase were completed in June of 2023. A month later, the CMGC started collaboration with the project design team, and in September 2023, the CMGC submitted a construction cost estimate, for 65% design plans, updating the previously estimated $136000000 project cost. The 65% project cost is currently 271 including a construction cost of 216 million. Upon receiving the updated project cost, the projecting cost, the progress of the design from 65 to 95%, to focus on verifying the cost estimate and identifying options to reduce project costs. This verification work is ongoing, and it does not appear that it will result in any meaningful reduction in the estimate. At this time, staff does not recommend proceeding into 95% design until decisions are made about potential scope changes to reduce the project cost. The cost reduction strategy is based on 3 categories. Construction methods and sequence. These options do not change the project design. Design modifications. These options will change the project design details. And project phases. The strategy will defer some project elements, be constructed by the city at a later date. The estimated cost saving for each option is preliminary and requires additional detailed work to determine actual savings. For this reason, the costs savings shown in tonight's presentation are wages, and should be taken as a rough order of magnitude rather than definitive numbers. The 1st category of cost production strategy is construction methods and sequence. The design team has evaluated adjustments, including various modifications to shoring, structures, and form work, box jacking, open cup method for tunnel construction, concurrent construction of the Evelyn Ramp, and castro undercrossing, and concurrent construction of the Sterling and Adobe Pit. The total potential savings from this category is 34 to $38 million. The 2nd category of the cost production strategy is design modifications. Various design alternatives for the bike and pet undercrossing have been evaluated to determine potential cost savings, and we recognize that these cost savings options require thoughtful consideration and deliberation as they do affect the user's experience. The 1st design modification is the elimination of the skylight for the adobe tunnel. If disenhancement is removed from the scope, the project team will ensure that the tunnel lighting is sufficient for visibility and safety for the user. Another cost reduction option is elimination of the secondary architectural waltz. These walls are proposed approximately 2 feet from the tunnel walls and provide access for periodic inspections and or repairs of the tunnel. If the architectural walls are eliminated, the concrete tunnel walls can be enhanced through use of paint, as shown in this image. And this bottom image is the photo of the Caltrain Dair dot station in San Jose illustrating an existing under crossing with no secondary architectural walls, as you can see. The tunnels are painted and uncovered, and the conduits are visible, but not unsightly due to them being organized and located on the ceiling. Another design modification that can result in cost reduction is elimination of 4 minors for retaining walls. The 65% design plants included use of form liners to enhance concrete finishes and textures for the retaining walls. If eliminated, the retaining walls can be enhanced through use of paint, as shown in the bottom image. Another design modification that can result in cost reduction is reducing the interior tunnel dimensions. The sterling and adobe tunnels would be reduced to 22 feet from 25 feet wide, um, the dimensions in parentheses are as designed at 65%. The casture undercrossing would be reduced to 35 from 40 feet wide. And all tunnel height would be reduced from almost 13 feet to 11 feet in height. The alternative dimensions are much wider than typically constructed as illustrated in the bottom image. This is a photo of the undercrossing of the Santa Clara Caltrain station, measuring 16 feet in width and 9 feet 2 inches in height. The total potential savings from this category is 5 to $6000000 The 3rd cost reduction strategy is project facing. Near term cost reductions can be realized by reducing the project scope to just the core grade separation elements, I shown in flu, and focusing on the undercrossing of the train tracks and central expressway for bikes and pets. The project elements. And table 5 are outside Caltrain right away and could be referred to be completed as a city project at a later date. The 1st item is the Evelyn Ramp to Shoreline. This will include bicycle and pedestrian pathway on the south side of Evelyn Avenue. The 2nd is the Evelyn S curve at Castro Street. This element could be completed as part of the permanent Castro pedestrian mall project and potentially be integrated into the redesign of the centennial plaza and reconfiguration and redevelopment of the transit center. The 3rd is the Moffatt streetscape improvements. Deferral of this element of the project provides an opportunity to develop a streetscape design through the upcoming Moffat precise plan. The total potential savings from this category of improvements is 19 to 21 million. The updated project has estimate is 271000000 a total of 133000000 in funding is secured or is anticipated leaving a current project funding shortfall of 1380000000 Shown in table 6, only around 59000000 to 65000000 in potential cost savings have been identified. Through the cost reduction strategy, all options are implemented. This leaves a next shortfall of 73 to $79 million. And this brings us to our 1st question, which has 2 parts. Question one A, are there any cost reduction strategy options listed in tables three, four, or 5 that the committee would not recommend for counsel consideration? One, B, are there any other cost reduction options the committee would like staff to explore? As mentioned, if all cost production strategies are implemented, there remains a net shortfall of $73 to $79 million. There are 2 additional scope production options that could be considered but have substantial drawbacks and create concerns. The 1st one is deferring the Adobe Tunnel under Central Expressway. And the 2nd one would be differing both the Sterling tunnel and the Adobe tunnel under Central Expressway. Staff does not recommend either option, but if necessary, the 1st option to defer the Adobe Tunnel would be preferred over no undercrossing central expressway. And this leads us to question 2 also has 2 parts. Two way, does the committee recommend deferring the Adobe Tunnel Lake under Central Expressway to be included in the cost reduction options to be presented to council? To be, does the committee recommend that staff further explore differing the undercrossing of Central Expressway, including whether it will jeopardize the grant. It appears that the only option to bring the project cost back close to the $1360000 is to implement all cost reduction options and defer the central expressway under crossings. Leaving the Caltrain under crossing as the only major element of the project. Alternatively, we can pursue additional grant funding. explore potential city revenue measure. And or reallocate city capital improvement program funding from other projects that use the funding sources listed. Another funding alternative is use of measure beef facts, the primary source for the castro and the rainstorf Avenue grade separation projects. Is the VTA's measure B grade separation program. The current estimate from VTA on the city's share is 234 million. The city is allowed to allocate the measure B funding between the 2 locations at its discretion. The table on the screen illustrates how we have been allocating measure B for the 2 great separation projects. City council can choose to prioritize one project by allocating more of the available measure B funds, and would need delaying the other project for an unknown number of years. until funding could be secure. This brings us to question number three. Um, question 38, does the committee have any feedback on the potential funding sources for closing the funding gap? 3 B, does the committee recommend that staff conduct an analysis, comparing the needs and benefits of the 2 great separation projects, and request that council prioritize the projects, including possible reallocation of the measure B funding and the recently awarded tership grant? For next steps, staff will continue to work with the project design team on value engineering options to reduce the project class. Staff plans to bring the potential cost production and funding options to counsel tentatively on January 23rd, 2024 to receive counsel direction. Before the project proceeds into 95% of the time. And this, like, here summarizes all the questions, um, in the presentation, you also have a copy in front of you. And with that work, we'd be happy to take any questions.

[00:21:37] Chair Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you so much. Does any member of committee have much? Start with questions, and then we'll take public comment and then we'll all come back and we'll answer the questions.

[00:21:50] Member Lisa Matichak: Questions too. So several questions. Um, First, uh, I imagine that all cities looking at, um, grave separations are experiencing the same thing. Do you have any information about any, will be, you know, considering the same questions of value engineering and cost cuts, et cetera. Do you have any information on how other cities are? Well,

[00:22:22] Public Works Director Cameron: thank you for the question. We'll start by saying the other 2 cities, participating in the measure, be great separation program, Sunnydale and Palo Alto, have been looking at Matthew, Morgan, where the 1st ones out the gate. We've been doing, like, doing all of this work. Um, We've had not had an opportunity to share with city of Sunnyvale staff, this latest news that is going to be happening shortly, because in many ways, they have proceeded the same way now, but, with our projects, they came up with their preferred concepts where they're 2 great separation, using their own consultant teams to come up with, order magnitude cost estimates. Um, when looking at their cost estimates for very avenue, which is all the scale of rainstore. It was looking, last I saw, it was looking very similar to what we thought race store would cost, but yeah, we received a new cost as many information. I know that they're cost estimate for Female Avenue, which they're taking a very similar tactic as we're taking it to Castro. They're going to close the route, the road crossing, which is to a bike bridge, but it's a simpler bike dead bridge, because they don't have to go under an expressway. But, um, They are just now starting, I think 35% design environmental for their Mary Avenue one, they're working on that 11st. And I do not believe yet. I think they could be in for surprise also. We're going to be sharing with them soon to get what our experience is. And they probably will want to take another look at their cost estimates, work with Caltrain. to see. Because it did seem like their estimates were originally aligned with ours. Alto is looking at so many options still and they're looking at tunneling location, very expensive stuff. The latest article on the paper, talked about, one of their options to combine, they're too close grade sets. It's going to be 800000000 for the 2 combined, but again, and they were, that was a tunnel once. So, They they may be more on point at this point in terms of what they think the great steps are going to cost. I will invite Andy, if you have further information about Sunnyvale or Bow Altos in terms of Whether I don't cost estimates. Yes,

[00:24:57] Andy Robbins: I could be Andy Robbins, director of capital program delivery for Caltrain. Uh, I think you covered it, uh, this camera for, you know, the, uh, Palo Alto and Sunnyvale projects. One I could mention to you at San Mateo County is the Burlingame Broadway, Great Crossing Project. That one is interesting because actually the movie, we've moved beyond the 65% design. So in that respect, the design is a little bit more advanced that this project. However, we have not yet brought on the contractor there. So we are relying on engineers estimates at this point. So, you can be sure that we'll be looking at that one very carefully as well. And one of the strategies that we're taking on now is to actually bring on a specialty consultant that really, their staff is made up of former contractors. And they're more familiar with these alternate project deliveries, like CMGC, progressive design buildings. We're going to be going actually going to our board on December 7th to, uh, hopefully award that contract. So I think that will help. You know, not only the Broadway, Burlingame project, but this one as well. I think we would tend to bring that consultant on to, uh, kind of, uh, bolster our, our, you know, our view of, uh, what the cost estimate should be for this project, as it goes forward, beyond 65%.

[00:26:39] Member Lisa Matichak: So I maybe I didn't quite understand the Berlin game project. It's ahead of ours, but you don't have the estimates.

[00:26:48] Andy Robbins: It's moved ahead in terms of the design effort. It's beyond 65% where this one, we've paused now at 65.

[00:26:55] Member Lisa Matichak: But you haven't come back with these estimates yet.

[00:26:58] Andy Robbins: We haven't brought on the contractors. So on the project, actually, we went through the CMGC process 1st on your project. I see. And we awarded that contract as the Stacy Myers. Berlington

[00:27:12] Member Lisa Matichak: may be up for a surprise as well. Yeah,

[00:27:14] Andy Robbins: I don't, you know, I don't want to, uh,

[00:27:16] Member Lisa Matichak: shock them,

[00:27:17] Andy Robbins: but I mean, certainly we will be exploring that one very carefully as with all of the great sub projects as well. And

[00:27:24] Member Lisa Matichak: then I'm not as familiar as I probably should be. What other up and down the peninsula, what other cities are looking at them, all of them?

[00:27:32] Andy Robbins: Well, the ones that we have in advancing so far beyond, besides the ones we just mentioned, there's 2 great steps between the city of San Bruno, the city of South San Francisco, Lyndon and Scott. Those 2 cities are working together to do those 2 projects at the same time. That one is in an earlier stage of design. No, it hasn't breached 35% design yet. So the, the ones we just mentioned Broadway, but it's, uh, the furthest of France right now. There's

[00:28:10] Economic Vitality Manager Lang: still some close to 40 grade

[00:28:13] Andy Robbins: crossings on the Caltrain right away. So, you know, over the next, uh, 10, 20 years, probably get to just all of them. These are the 6 or 7 projects that are moving forward so far. Thank

[00:28:28] Member Lisa Matichak: you. that's helpful. Um, Then another question. Okay, this is a naive question. How much do interest rate, high interest rates come into play here, do they at all? Or are they affecting the cost estimate at all? Inflation

[00:28:52] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: is included. Yeah, it's.

[00:28:57] Public Works Director Cameron: High interest rates or financing rates would affect the project cost if, if we're financing it, issuing bonds or some else at this point, that has not been the plan, because we have the funding. So we're just primarily affected by inflation and construction costs. Okay. And then another

[00:29:20] Member Lisa Matichak: question is, you would talk, I, when I had a briefing with you, you had talked about um, signal synchronization. And, um, and how that, Could you explain that again? Because I thought it was helpful and might be helpful.

[00:29:38] Public Works Director Cameron: I think what you're referring to is signal preemption. Yes, exactly. What I was explaining to committee member picks is, What happens now when Caltrain approaches are into such a Castro and also a frame store, it has signal preemption that it takes over the signals that is happening on the Central Expressway intersection. And if the goal to signal preemption is to make sure those tracks get cleared of any cars that may be sitting on the tracks. Castro, what has happened and has really affected vice a pitch, trying to cross Central Expressway, is a train is approaching Castro either direction. The 1st thing it wants to happens is it, it wants to go green on the northbound astroke to clear those tracks. But what it does do then is it turns Central Expressway bread. No matter where the signal isn't the cycle, it just turns it red. Um, And then it lets central go because it's parallel. and doesn't let anybody, any vehicles, bikes, or pets cross central. So it, what can happen is because central gets the green, for most of the time, especially if you have several trains and close timing to each other coming and going. You could have, we used to have bikes and passes in tocan. on one on the moffet. side of central, have to wait through a very long period before they can get a crossing light for central expressway. One of the reasons the city opted on our own to eliminate left turning vehicles with Castro onto Central is one of our concerns of what was happening in pedestrians could be crossing the west side. Um, crossing. And again, the thing about preemption is it turns the lights right there, and we had the potential for bikes of pets, especially pets, to be stranded in the middle of central. And be given that no, don't cross any longer light. So we decided one of the ways to help eliminate that conflict, because again, they're trying to clear northbound central, that left turning cars, straight cars, the right ones, was to stop the left turning cars. When? There is no people crossing up the trade tracks whatsoever. And you know, we're 3 quarters of the way there with Castro. The only vehicle processing that's allowed today is northbound central coming off of Evelyn, right? To either go straight on off it or right. When that closes, it stops. The signal preemption of Central Expressway would no longer be needed because there are no commerce crossing the train tracks. And central does not, I mean, benefit does not continue through to Castro. So with that, we would hope then we could work with County of Santa Clara, who has that signal and Caltrain. Um, in that type of situation, there's at great crossings, that bikes, that we still do a really good biking pet signal crossing of central. There's no preemption to stop them. When they cross central and they get to the train tracks, they're the quad gates, there are ways to tell bikes and deaths, you cannot continue. And you could do it on that side of Central. That's a scenario where there's no vehicle crossing. But there still is at rate by compared crossing. Those are my questions. So along those same lines. I'm trying to visualize if you're crossing central, and there's no longer any vehicle, crossing the train tracks, and the bikes, where do bikes like pause? Uh, Would they pause on that? Okay, sorry. I think those would

[00:33:52] Member Lisa Matichak: be back across central. Until

[00:33:56] Public Works Director Cameron: the train's gone, or do they cross central. We would want to try to pause them on the south side of Central. Because if Marvin and Central is a tea intersection, Let the bikes and pads cross central. But they may be paused at the trade tracks with quad gates, that type of thing. Um, until the train has passed and the gates raise and then they would continue their journey crossing the tracks. And is

[00:34:29] Member Lisa Matichak: there a space there now?

[00:34:30] Public Works Director Cameron: Well, there is some space. We would have to confirm that there's enough. But as I recall, there's enough space for at least one car length or 2 between Central Expressway and the train tracks. So there is space. There is space. And, uh, put the, If we didn't. That's for likes and pets, but we stopped it. Um, The light of central be changed, so it's a scramble. Doubtful. And one, it's not our life. Yes, county of Santa Clara. It is an expressway and they, um, tend to be a little more traditional than approach to signals. But again, if it's a tea intersection. It's going to be easier to give a lot more crossing time to buy some pets, to have it cycle back around to them more frequently. In that particular case. And if you, along the same lines, if you didn't go under central. Would anything have to be redesigned, um, to just get, um, on the landing, under the train tracks. Which is what we have. If there was a decision to just go under the train tracks and not central. I'm not necessarily advocating. No, understood. just want to understand the applications. Yes, there would have to be some some type of redesign. It's help, help them to commute, think in terms of the placement of stairs and

[00:36:22] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: ramps and all that. The upper and lower concourse areas provided access across or under the Caltrain tracks. We would have to adjust the design on the upper concourse. Perhaps to not allow the crossing, uh, That would know, I think we would, we would have to evaluate it some more, but there will be impact to, uh, the environmental studies that were done as well during the 35%. Because we would have to reevaluate the circulation of the bison pads if we refer those 2 other processes. But

[00:37:09] Public Works Director Cameron: yes, there would definitely be some type of redesign involved. It's just under the train tracks at the central summer. once you get the vice pits across central, you need a very convenient ramp area and stair area that they would use. And then if we deferred going by just central. And What are sort of the implications for doing that at a later date? Or what do you do now? Do you

[00:37:50] Member Lisa Matichak: plan for that and do some things differently? What did you sway?

[00:38:02] Public Works Director Cameron: Because going adding under central would be a very high cost and complicated project and we have no idea how long it may take before the sneak could return and do that. We would likely to sign the undercrossing of the rail tracks as a more long-term solution and then modify as needed to connect it, a tunnel through under central. So you'd have to do a little bit of redesigning out. to accommodate a future expansion of it. I would envision that. And again, I invite staff that it, um, see

[00:38:49] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: it differently. Um, one big item would be the utility relocation, we would still want to relocate them outside the footprint. of for the future, if we were to differ the central undercross seas. Um, so it would still be outside of the bigger, um, project rapport element of the project. That's one of the bigger implications, I think, because there are still a lot of utilities that we would need to relocate due to the burn lower concourse areas. That's a very deep excavation. And perhaps there could be some utilities on central that could be differed also.

[00:39:36] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: Uh, But, I think. The utility relocation might be. Sorry,

[00:39:46] Member Lisa Matichak: I had a quick comment because I don't want to forget it later. And that is, when this comes to counseling, um, that we have the discussion, I think would be helpful to have additional information on implications. redesign. Yeah. Yeah. And cost. possible, yeah. Um, because

[00:40:07] Public Works Director Cameron: I'm thinking if it's a huge cost. now.

[00:40:14] Unknown Speaker: Scary, but I guess I don't have enough information to know. And that would be helpful. Let's see. I think it's all the questions I have for now. Thank you.

[00:40:28] Chair Ellen Kamei: Thank you. So, Um, a bunch of different questions. I'd say I haven't, uh, haven't grouped them all, but just as colleagues were asking, things popped up on some things that I had thought about prior. So, Dovetailing off a Committee of Armada Chuck's question. So the design proposal was completed. This 65% set. It was Julie. Okay. So since, since June to now, I know we are evaluating and discussing tonight some cost production options. But what were there? They're pre-design options that could also be cheap for their options. But we, Now that we know what the cost has to admit, true process of it is from, How's that consultant of culture? Right? I don't know. Well, because I think that that's, Councilman Ranch asking about some of the implications, and I wonder, because some of some of this, it looks like we're trying to make some recommendations based off of the design that we had prior. Right? But are there other things, stair placement that could help. I don't know. Or when that cost the city. more money to look at that and we just need to work with the design. as proposed and just reduce the design. Because that question makes sense. And we have this original proprisal. Right. Now we know what the true cost estimate is. Is there? Are

[00:42:19] Public Works Director Cameron: there any other redesign options that we have not already showed you on the screen? Because I'm assuming, can have given the Responses

[00:42:31] Chair Ellen Kamei: for Cal. This what we're facing, the other jurisdictions we'll need to face too. So are all jurisdictions just going to need to find ways to cut costs on the design as it was proposed or would they also all over a redesign? don't know. given the constraints, the inflation, the construction costs. It's just a question.

[00:42:56] Public Works Director Cameron: No, it's a very fair question. So, um, A couple things. One is what became clear in all of this exercise and why you've heard that the only option that gets it back down close to 1360000 is just going to the track tracks. Just do that. That is reflective of incredibly high cost of the tunneling. That is driving the, a huge piece of this cost. So changing a location of the stairway or you have to have ramps. You have to have the ADXs. You have to have ramps or elevators, right? So trying to adjust those locations. Would not necessarily save money, in fact, it sends you back to earlier design phases, you're kind of starting over. Try to eliminate any of them. Um, would be an issue. One of the reasons we have so many stairs and rats, is because it's the unique location that it's also the entryway to the Caltrain platform in the life field platform. So we needed not just at the very beginning at Castle Street to get them down and they just stay down, stay going to cross Central, we had to have the midway up. So they could get to the other platforms. Yeah. Okay. Alright. So,

[00:44:25] Chair Ellen Kamei: um, I not going forward with the... Oh, sorry.

[00:44:31] Transportation Manager Lo: Okay. Kind of very low, a matter of government communicator, thanks for having me. I just wanted to sort of address some of the other questions about the other jurisdictions and, um, We've been undergoing a process called the quarter crossing strategy, which the jurisdictions along the Caltrain Quarter have been very involved in. In fact, there's a workshop on Thursday night, um, and, uh, Council member of it, I guess. on the local policy maintenance group. And so, um, the LPNGs meeting that evening to do a further workshop on the study. And there's 2 major deliverables from that. And the 1st is a delivery guide, which has kind of taken our standards and all the lessons learned. So that individual projects can be done more efficiently, and there's clarity and rules and responsibilities, and it's not reinventing the wheel every time, and I know Mountain View feels like it's been out in front, and, um, been the test case for a lot of things, but that strategy guide is supposed to help all the cities and jurisdictions afford in a much more efficient manner. And then the 2nd piece is trying to determine a quarter wide strategy about how to do these approximately 40 crossings moving forward and do we have a comprehensive way to approach that, which could be very helpful in? funding as well because I think we've heard that going at it one at a time is not the most efficient way of doing funding. So those efforts are underway. We're very thankful to all the cities for participating in that effort. And so, um, that, that's one way that we're trying to do things.

[00:46:08] Chair Ellen Kamei: What will that look like? Would there be a document that the university can see or a deliverable date that. Yeah, so

[00:46:16] Transportation Manager Lo: the delivery guide, which is for the individual projects is supposed to be towards the end of this year or early next year. And so I've read the draft. It's well on its way. Um, and then the strategy is, um, as an on way process, but we've been chipping away at it, we had our, um, the city staff. CSCG met and did a workshop 2 weeks ago. So, um, that was the 2nd workshop we've had and so I think we're just moving closer, getting input from all the cities. Okay,

[00:46:47] Unknown Speaker: yeah. So does the strategy include, um, some, uh, how to put it, some, some, uh, group lobbying for more funds because it just seems like this, you know, we could go ahead and do a quick and dirty that's not really that safe. But then we gobble up a bunch of funds and other people don't have them. It seems like there's going to be a group effort to pursue more funds at some point anyway. And I'd prefer to hear about that now rather than after we've done a quick and dirty

[00:47:20] Transportation Manager Lo: undercrossing in the center project. Yeah, I mean, I think that one thing with the strategy effort was that it shouldn't slow down any individual project that was already underway. So we didn't want it to under or hamper any projects such as this one that's already underway. However, we do hope that the long-term product out of that will be a way to approach funding together. But that is still a TPD. Adonic. No,

[00:47:49] Public Works Director Cameron: I do appreciate, um, what Ms. Lowe was saying, and yes, we're very aware of it, anticipating it, but as mentioned, By time Caltrain started on this, we were already blown away with our 2 grade steps. And in the end, they've been using us as lessons learned and a lot of what you're going to see in this strategy is based upon what they've learned from Burlingame and those are 2 projects. Um, And while I'm not certain it would lead to meaningful reductions in the costs of these delivering these projects because these is just, this is construction. costs that we're dealing with here. Um, especially at each city, because this strategy is being developed similar to how we've approached the measure B program, where each city is making the decision on the design concept, how we want to approach it. It's very important to have some level control there. And that is part of the driver of the cost. What it does strategy does do, and it's something we have felt. You know, we've struggled with a little bit. is if there's a quarter wide strategy that could then lead to quarter wide agreements of could several adjacent grades that happen around the same time, and therefore Caltrain could then be willing to have interrupted services or something like that. Because you get a bigger bang for the bug. And these are all things that I know they're working through. And one of the things you'll notice, we mentioned, that one cost saver for us is that they would agree to a 25 hour weekend shutdown, which they're still exploring. I expect this quarter, cross quarter strategy to be also looking at those types of delivery methods, what cowtrain will support, won't support, which won up all the great steps. Um, It doesn't come with money. It does set the stage to try to get more money. Um, but that will take, that could take years. So one thing to think about here is, again, in our city ends up selecting one, to be our priority, we have enough money to deliver one. We get it done. Maybe the other one tries to take advantage of any new 4 wide funding strategies that make up a loss. That's a little waste in the way. It could really help with digital brands. We are really struggling with getting it. We know how important Castro and restore are, but when we try to sell it to the federal government, when they're looking at projects for the entire country, we don't do as well, but if you had a whole corridor strategy. So you're saying the corridor strategy may help. They help with federal grants when it's ready because it will be a much more compelling project story. Yeah. Um, and

[00:50:44] Chair Ellen Kamei: then some other questions. So, for if we don't proceed with the 95% design, which is what staff's recommending, does that jeopardize any of the funding that we already allocated, whatever funds we have towards that, will we still be able to use that? So

[00:51:05] Public Works Director Cameron: we're not actually recommending not doing 95% design, but that what we're saying is we're recommending. We pause. Because we'd rather not spend money on a designing project elements that is decided to defer or something like that. And we may have to adjust the 65% based upon the projects for changes. In terms of the plan resources

[00:51:30] Chair Ellen Kamei: we currently have, um, Sometimes grants have time limits, right? It's like. I just want to make sure that any decisions we make, don't jeopardize, making sure we fully utilize whatever funds we already. Italian. Yes. Most

[00:51:46] Public Works Director Cameron: of our money is measure B, and what hasn't been spent, yeah, deceptive. We can work with ETA all night. Some of it is our own city funds that we would have flexibility. The 2 brats we have right now. Is we have the SB one local partnership grant from the state for 25 million, which is for Castro. That's the one where like, Are we jeopardizing that one? Other grant is a $20-000000 grant called Tersip from California State Transit, in your city group. Yep. Nice one. That was the one where the state agency said. They would like to see it on ringstore, but the city may choose to put some of it on Castro, and we came forward to you and said, hey, that's just a little 20000000 on the store. But we are still free to move that money back at this point. It's not too far away. So, okay, we are concerned about grant timelines, but the one for tonight that could be most affected is that as we want local partnership practice, it was specific to Castro. Um, Okay, and then, as

[00:53:04] Chair Ellen Kamei: we go through, uh, answering the the 3 questions, this will go to the full council, and the new here, and then we'll see how we, you know, put the majority of councils, things and and procedures. Okay. Um, I had a question on some of. Oh, here we go, that. The secondary, the painted tunnel walls. So some of the examples. To my recollection. As a Caltrain user are not. Does Caltrain have any new examples of painted walls or retaining? Well, images or any underpasses. I

[00:54:01] Transportation Manager Lo: wouldn't say they're painted. I think that the 25th Avenue breaks up in San Mateo's, the most recent one, but it's not a bike head only underpass. Um, there are some tile features, and then South San Francisco station, um, had a remodeling to go underneath the tracks, and that has tile, but I, I don't know the technical terms for the futures, but... Yeah,

[00:54:29] Chair Ellen Kamei: because I think some of, from what I think, some of these are, this way for a while. time, right? No. Okay. Um, and then, um, for the, for changing the amount of feet, sorry, because you're not technical terms, but the the wisps that were mentioned. So, uh, the narrowing. My my concern was a little bit about kind of the multibodal aspect, and I think that we've talked about that, like, part of it, because it's supposed to be, Heads, cyclists, scooters, whomever. I think one of the things I've noticed in like the narrower, like when I look at something like 16 feet. I don't know if there's like a new standard on the width because I just feel like, for example, like the Santa Clara Caltrain. You know, people mix flow. I don't know if that's the right term, but it's not, you know, separated and I find that to be like, typical. So as we're looking at narrowing, I understand it's a cost reduction. Are we thinking? And apologies. I think I've seen this design. Are we thinking that it would be mixed flow? We still have enough room where people could have a separated planes of these are, you know, pets, this is for cycles. The

[00:56:07] Public Works Director Cameron: 22 feet does still give you the separated bike, uh, at versus pet. Okay. The bridge over 101 shoreline you've been deciding is 20 feet wide. The idea being is 12 feet just for bicyclists, 2 6 foot lanes and 8 feet for pedestrians. Here, one of the reasons we didn't go down to 20 feet is because you're underground with walls and felt that that extra cushionable foot on each side, isn't there no skylight, right? Right. It makes you exactly. So that's why we're showing the most we would reduce it down is 22 because it still leaves the ability to separate and not feel too cramped. We would

[00:56:54] Chair Ellen Kamei: do like treatments there so people could see that it...

[00:57:00] Public Works Director Cameron: For the castro meat tunnel, that wouldn't be separated because it's a mix. Yeah, I'm just trying to remember the design

[00:57:06] Chair Ellen Kamei: too, like what we had talked about in terms of like, the public art, which I know we're going to talk about. Yeah, you know, so I'm just I'm trying to meld the different... into the sterling adobe

[00:57:16] Daniel Hulse: tunnels, those are the ones that fork. And then the casserole bean tunnel is really the line right under the tracks and it's largely because of the large mixture there. Yeah.

[00:57:35] Chair Ellen Kamei: Those are my questions for now. Do colleagues have other? Okay, later. I know, you never know what will get sparked. So, uh, thank you very much. We'll move on to public comment, and we will take, uh, In person 1st, so would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person, like to provide comment on a comment, sorry, sorry, on this item. If so, please click the racian, but zoom or approach the lectern. We're gonna take in person, speakers first, each speaker will have 3 minutes. First. No problem. If not, we have a, Virtual. Okay, so we'll, um, work to get a timer up for 3 minutes and then we'll start with our public. All right. Uh, braid it. If you just have to. Like the unmute, Braden. About Bruce England. Okay,

[00:59:15] Bruce England: I can jump in. Um, thank you.

[00:59:18] Bruce England: I, this is Bruce England, Wisman Station Drive, uh, speaking for myself, but also on behalf of members of Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition, Mountain View team. I wrote my comments before you got into the whole discussion about funding and all of that, but needless to say, we want this project to go through. If there are delays, that's truly unfortunate, but we wouldn't want this project to go away. Um, because of that. It's just too important. The transit center's there. It's a hub for, you know, it's a central point for the city, obviously. And then you also are dealing with a Moffat Boulevard precise plant. And, um, tying the traditional downtown with the new downtown area while I'm off at Boulevard. It just this just has to happen. The other 2 comments I have is, um, this has been brought up before, but we, there's a desire to have a raised crosswalk in the S curve area. I know that's not part of your funding discussion, but I just want to bring it up to keep it in people's, on people's radars as much as possible. It's a tricky point because cars are going around that somewhat blindly and to just have a crosswalk there without it being raised. Probably wouldn't be a good idea. Also want to suggest considering eliminating the Evelyn is Shoreline on-wrap. It's not particularly popular with a lot of people. And closing the stretch of Evelyn between Brian and Shoreline to vehicular traffic, could introduce the new open space opportunity for Mountain View and improve the environment behind a potential new housing as part of the public safety building work. And that's what I got. Thank you. Great,

[01:00:56] Chair Ellen Kamei: thank you. Braden, let's try again. Great W there? Okay, I think the hand went down. Daniel Hulcy. Yeah,

[01:01:28] Daniel Hulse: hi. Can you hear me? Yes. All right. Uh, so I I sent in a, a letter, uh, but I have a few more comments here that are more broad. Um, I, I think if there isn't a tunnel under Central Expressway of some kind that provides pedestrian access. Uh, this project will have failed in some respects. Uh, I think it's just a very important thing. Um, and so, I, you know, to be honest, I, it doesn't matter to me that much, how wide the tunnel is or, or, uh, you know, whether it's one tunnel or, or 2 tunnels, as long as we have that pedestrian access, I, I think, it's a whole lot better than us having to like defer the project or, or, uh, reduce the scope or anything like that. Um, And I think one thing that I have in my head that, you know, uh, as an idea is if we only go with one tunnel or that could be an option to just cap off it at central. Um, so that pedestrians have free reign to cross Moffat. Um, So, I, you know, I don't know if that's in the cards, but I, I think, uh, if you could look into it. Uh, that, that would be good. Um, So that those are my, my comments. I guess the other thing you could look at is the, the size of the ramp into the concourse area just seems very large for some reason. Um, but, those are my comments on, on value engineering. Thanks. Great thank you. Emil,

[01:03:20] Transportation Manager Lo: Abraham. Hi,

[01:03:24] Emil Abraham: can you hear me? Yes. Okay, cool. Um, yeah, I'm Emil Abraham. I live at 555 West Middlefield. Um, Yeah, I hear the, the, the, the crazy cost increase. Um, and yeah, it is these cuts are difficult to make. Um, so I'd strongly recommend cutting costs in things that don't change the functionality that much. Like, for example, like the tunnels. We really want tunnels crossing Central Expressway. If we can't have two. lets at least try for one. Um, because crossing Central Expressway is absolutely miserable, you can get stuck in the middle if you don't have enough time to cross. And I hear the arguments for, like, the reason why the tunnels are so expensive is because it's really difficult to make an ADA compliant. But I ask, look at the current situation. I'm not sure Central Expressway is that great of an experience for people in wheelchairs or anything like that. So, I think that having a tunnel would be better than having no tunnel. So if you were to save costs, try not to cut, um, any of these tunnels. And yeah, and looking towards the future, if we're planning on building out Moffatt, um, Boulevard to be like a thriving extension of downtown, it would be a great addition to be able to cross Central Expressway without having to wait for a light for pedestrians and bicycles. Um, so, think I, I do see that, yeah, costs are very expensive, but this is very much a long term, um, goal rather than like a short term, oh, let's try to get it done. Um, so I really, really encourage to keep that tunnel so that we can think of the future far into the future. Um, it's think of this as a big investment. Yeah, thank you very much. Great, thank you. Mary, Dadia. Um,

[01:05:23] Mary Dateo: I apologize for joining late, so I haven't absorbed much of this, but, um, I was just thinking about the tunnel whist a little bit and the San Antonio Cal train station being 15 feet wide. Um, That one, always feels a little bit narrow to me. Um, and I guess I'm picturing downtown people coming across the street from Sterling or from Adobe. I mean, I would think we're expecting 20 or 30 people, maybe, to be coming across at a time once everything gets up and running, and that, just, um, to have a, to, to narrow the dimension down to 22 feet. Um, I don't know, it's so hard to picture this. In the abstract, but 22 feet. I mean, that doesn't sound much larger than the 15 feet we have at San Antonio, and I can't imagine 20 or 30 people moving through that tunnel in 2 different directions at the same time. So I just wonder, If I'd almost be willing to, if we could have it be just a little bit wider, like the original width, like 25 feet, and maybe make it not be 11 feet tall. Um, that's all I got. Thank you for, um, your attention. Thank you.

[01:06:44] Chair Ellen Kamei: All right, last call for in person or virtual speakers on item 5.one. Others. So I'll bring this item back for committee action. And so, uh, we just say, if any members have questions, you can go back to attention or if they want to start, um, feel comfortable doing questions, what, one through 3 or if we could just do question one, A, B. Committee members feel like they would like to do. Are you ready to comment? I don't have one question. Okay. Do you want to do? Oh. All 6 questions. All 3 questions and once I

[01:07:32] Public Works Director Cameron: can do one or 2 of them. How are you looking to do?

[01:07:36] Chair Ellen Kamei: We can do them all together. I don't, I don't know. Start? Okay. So I

[01:07:42] Member Lisa Matichak: guess I'm I'm open to some of the cost cutting, I'll start out by saying that, but just as the my overall picture on this, Um, First, this is the center of our city. So some of the, I appreciate the drawings, but it seems to me like some of them were not in the center of the city. And I think we have to keep that in mind that, you know, where we are. And, um, you know, we're trying to tie the 2 parts of the downtown, and I think we expect a lot of, as Miss Statio said, a lot of um, pedestrians and bicyclists here. So I, I have a different perspective on uh, what the outcome needs to be than I would if it were, if it were somewhere else. Um, so with that in mind, um, I, And my other, although I'll go through like point by point, what I would, um, what I would do and what I would not. Um, I guess the big picture for me is that if you eliminate both of the tunnels to Moffatt, then I don't think it's very safe. Um, I actually think then we're spending a lot of money and not getting a lot of safety from it. So, um, So that's, That's something that I personally would not want to do with as one of my colleagues really convinces me that it's a fabulous idea and there's something I've overlooked. Um, one of them maybe, but um, But not both. Um, So, uh, and then the other thing that's on the back of my mind is what I brought up with all the other, um, you know, with with the other cities and the other, uh, Great separations. I would hate, I said this before, my questions, but I would hate that we do something quick and dirty in the center of our city that may not even be that safe, and then everybody else gets together and gets a bunch of federal money. We've done. That's, that's another place I just don't want to go. Um, so with that said, the individual, Um, let's see, tables, uh, three. So table 3 was your, um, One of them, table 3 was the construction methods and sequences, and included things like, um, 55 hour weekend. Caltrain shut down so that things shut down so that things could be reduced duration and doing things together. Um, All those sound like. I have no problem with any of those. Um, The 2nd one, table 4, which is design modifications. Firstly, We eliminate the skylight for the adobe tunnel doesn't save us that much and I like skylights. However, on the other hand, if we're eliminating the Adobe tunnel, then you've... Okay. But otherwise, those are the kind of things that I wouldn't take out, you know, just save pennies and make it not a nice place in our downtime. Um, I'm having trouble picturing the architectural walls, the form liners, and, you know, I don't know the difference between between with and without. But again, this is the center of our city and I don't, I don't, I'm actually fine with industrial and so forth in some places, but I don't want to be to, um, you know, what, what might be done at some BART stations, at frequented a lot of art stations, somewhere in the central city somewhere. I think we have to. Whatever the finishes are, they have to be fine for the center of the city. Um, Reducing the tunnel dimensions. Um, I mean, I'm probably fine. Again, I have trouble picturing it, but I'd probably find that the 22 feet, but I could, I'm not too married to that one. Um, Then the, The last one, table five, which is project phasing, um, The, Evelyn Ramp to Shoreline, I think a lot of people are questioning that. So, that, if that were something that, um, that we could not do, I, a lot of members of the community said that, that they're not particularly into that. Um, and then, some of these things, the S curb and the Moffatt streetscaping, Um, I would be into, including as part of the Moffat precise plan. That would give us, maybe, the design flexibility. I mean, it's good news, bad news to do that because costs may escalate, but it would give us the good news is it would give us some design flexibility. Maybe we want to do something. Something different there and maybe it'll make something better. So, um, because these plants are kind of old. And then for number two, um, Does the committee recommend deferring the adobe tunnel leg? Um, I would be okay with that. Yeah, and maybe doing it later, but the, um, Central Expressway, um, Leg, I, I don't want to defer all the tunneling under, simple expressway. So, That's that's where I land, I may come back for a 2nd round. Did you want to do three? Oh, you want me to do three? Okay. I don't remember what it is. Um, funding sources. Um, Go. Yes, does the committee recommend that staff conduct an analysis comparing the needs and benefits of the 2 great separation projects, and I would say yes. And A, feedback on potential funding sources. I would just, I would like to be able to go for more from the federal government with everyone else. It's one piece of my feet. And you could, the other one was the one that was devoted to rent dwarf. I mean, we could, as we evaluate those, we could take a sacrifice with that. Great,

[01:14:49] Chair Ellen Kamei: thank you. Could you imagine? Thanks. On table three. Um, I am okay with all the things. And I

[01:15:03] Member Lisa Matichak: did want to know that it has my aunt, she's listening here. Actually,

[01:15:08] Public Works Director Cameron: I probably heard the office. They're talking to different deals. Um, but I do think it could be for, um, it can be a separate project. Um, but I am okay with going to the freeze. And April four. Um. I had concerns about pushing or eliminating any of these research now. And

[01:15:40] Member Lisa Matichak: I think that's because as people with COVID, this is in depth time now. We want it to be a good user experience, a lot of people to feel safe. And um, have not just

[01:15:56] Public Works Director Cameron: if you're walking, like, separation of bikes and heads. And, um, People use it. And

[01:16:03] Member Lisa Matichak: so I think having a good design is really important, um, especially on the extra life. So I

[01:16:10] Public Works Director Cameron: would prefer to not do many of these design modifications at all possible. Um, the, Other questions.

[01:16:37] Member Lisa Matichak: I, um, like I said, I think we put it for the Edwin Mail. And

[01:16:42] Public Works Director Cameron: I think we could also, it also makes sense to have the escorted and the streetscapes incorporated other countries that have. I think that makes a lot of sense to do that. I, I am concerned that if we, if

[01:17:00] Member Lisa Matichak: we don't do the tunnels under central. And but we plan for them. Um, they might never get back to them. And that would be, because I think that's one of the huge references, is to have tunnels under central. I am open to, and I would like to see that evaluation of Frank Starf and Castro, and

[01:17:29] Public Works Director Cameron: the benefits of each. I think I might be supply. with that analysis before I thought about it. Um, And so I'm interested to see what staff has to say. I'm also open, to looking at what other CIP

[01:17:46] Member Lisa Matichak: projects we have. that might be pushed out, and that doesn't mean just funds related to transportation, but there might be a new standard concessions that you can potentially, um, consider pushing out a bit. I want

[01:18:03] Public Works Director Cameron: to add, though, that I uh, I think when I 1st read the staff report, my job kind of dropped. And I thought, oh, no, this can't be right. That must be a tight level. Um And

[01:18:15] Member Lisa Matichak: I guess I'm still kind of shocked. At the plastic crease and feeling like any day now, somebody's going to come back and say, oh, come on, make mistake. It actually is that original estimate because... It's just kind of unheard of, unbelievable. I'd show you, uh, public

[01:18:44] Public Works Director Cameron: web structure. kind of a denial about this. And so it is kind of hard to say, well, what would I do? Really?

[01:18:51] Member Lisa Matichak: I just want the project as designed for the price that we thought it was going to be. Um, I do agree with the comment about maybe you should work with others. This is not going to happen. It's going to change. Um, we should work with others

[01:19:10] Public Works Director Cameron: to try and get federal funding for this. Um, You know, we have lots of projects we want to do with the revenue measure. I don't think we can dedicate all of that to this because there are so many other projects we have. Everyone get done.

[01:19:26] Unknown Speaker: So it's a real challenge. And I guess I mentioned before. Just cuts to

[01:19:34] Public Works Director Cameron: counsel, just a little more information on what happens if we didn't do the tunnels under central at this point. I don't necessarily. Uh,

[01:19:48] Member Lisa Matichak: that I answer. I think I asked you everything the same week. Did today? Yes, okay. Except that we talk to different people about it. Yes, yes. Okay. Um, all right. So

[01:20:06] Chair Ellen Kamei: I think that I, I guess my, my denial might be like the other spectrum, which is, I feel concerned that the committee will make recommendations. It'll come in January and then we're going to get a cost increase again. That is my concern. So I, I, you know, I think that to be off by this amount, you know, the estimate versus what we're told, within a year just feels like, I, I, I don't know, you know, I would, I would ask, does that mean that we're, we're looking at a different contractor in the future or we need different evaluation criteria? I feel like those are questions so that like councils and jurisdictions can more adequately prepare for this type of endeavor because I feel like, um, the decisions we're talking about tonight. They're not easy ones. I think they really affect our communities and, um, We already have like we progressively pursued different grants only to be at a gap again. I think is really a difficult position to be in, especially if you're a jurisdiction like ours that's on the front end and forward. So I would just ask for like our partner organizations. You know, I don't, I don't know if there's just like a sole contract or there's multiple different bids that go out as we're doing this process, but some things so that the jurisdictions, like we're just better prepared for what things really cost. Um, and then we can prepare our residents who I think, um, really are invested in these types of infrastructure improvement. So I guess that's how I'd like to start. Um, so for um, question one A, Um, Let's see, so table 3, um, that's I'm fine. For table four. I feel very similar to my colleagues, which is, I don't know that I really want to compromise on the design or the user experience for because it's in the heart of our downtown and I was also thinking about we are looking to redo our transit center. And so if we're looking to do that, you really need to have, you know, design and to match that and, um, that's, you know, wanting to make sure too, I think, and Caltray can correct me, what are Mountain View Station is one of the most highly used stations on the corner, correct? So, I think it's like Berlin game, SF. It's going to say, sorry. Gear it on Healthy. Gear, get more nominate. Yeah. So just thinking about the high number of usage that we get makes me feel like for people who I really like to avoid anything that would take away from that because people Or trying to encourage people to use transit versus discourage. Um, and then for table five. Um, I feel open, to, to have suggestions. I appreciate what counts some of the magic was saying about kind of maybe incorporating those into other projects that exist for the city and as a way to reduce the cost. I think that's smart. Um, okay. And then any other costraductions? Okay, so that kind of goes to that. Question 2 A. Um, I don't. Again, a concern is if we defer the tunnels. that it'll only cost us a city more, you know, hopefully that will be after all of our 10 year household, but it'll cost us any more and it might not ever happen. So I really don't want to prefer the tunnel. Um, I think that, Thinking about the flow, um, is important and I don't know if we have like current decision numbers on which we feel. you know, when Adobe or Central get our usage, I'd be interested.

[01:25:00] Public Works Director Cameron: So you're talking about the 2 legs under central. So there are 2 factors that lead staff to say if we eliminate one, it would be the adobe. Yeah. 1st off, the Sterling one. is the one that we expect to get the highest use and it is part of the bicycle cord or we're putting together that leads it to the market. The other pieces, that's where we need more room for the ramps and the stairs, for very constraint of the adobe side to piper. Pretty impossible plant a wrap and make it work. It would have to be a very narrow wrap. That's why we went the elevator option. So the idea of having just one tunnel and the only ADA access is be an elevator? What do we do? So we felt that if it's only going to be one, it would have to be this.. All

[01:25:55] Chair Ellen Kamei: right. See, question three. Any other feedback, special funding, please replace the cap. So the thing that I can't get out of my head is just thinking about our transit center and thinking about the when we're gonna have final design and construction on that. I know we haven't gone forward yet. But what would the timeline be on this project with our transit center? Is there an opportunity there to capitalize on it? budgeting or make it more attractive to the special property. I liked the ideas that colleagues had about. going together as the 4 door, but if we're looking to, to make the center master plan, plus this. I don't have a timing or if there is anything we're going to be doing for the transit center while we're doing grade steps that helps reduce cost overall. don't know. I mean, that would be like, oh, but.

[01:26:54] Public Works Director Cameron: Don't know about the transconsider. The thing to be aware of for the transit center is most of it is land owned by country and in a development project. Parking my thought. Um, which, technically, you know, along. Sources come back. What we would want to do, what we previously talked about was working with Caltrain that is as part of in joint development. We get the joint development to pay for the reconfiguration of the transit center in terms of how the buses and shuttles move through, we place that parking there, keep that parking time, going to ground through those, and help us fund a redesign. So, It's an unknown situation of if there's a way to attract other funding in, that could then help forward with the great separation project. Um, The other, I had an option to look at is the permanent pedestrian call. As we've said, you know, yeah, we're still a few years away from that one. We know that's going to cost us a bit of money. Is there an option to look at, um, kind of integrating in an undercrossing as part of the permanent pen mall and with that crate, a way to attract more money because now it's this ped mall. that thing connects through to the 2nd part of downtown or mombet side. So these are different ways that we could look at time that's into our future parts. We have so much learning for this area. Well, and I think,

[01:28:45] Chair Ellen Kamei: you know, just with our partners in the room, just letting them know that these are things that council members are thinking about as we're trying to like reduce the costs is, you know, I know that we have many different collaborative projects going on it. So can we do any? Um, as we're talking about closing funding gaps, right? Especially if it's in your right way and not in your plan. Okay, great. Those are, I think, all our answers to the questions. I tried to our gate and summarize. Um, but I don't know if you want to start 1st or you'll be intending

[01:29:22] Public Works Director Cameron: to get a test or?

[01:29:23] Chair Ellen Kamei: No, I would probably like to summarize. I'm trying to treat it as a study session in terms of recapping for colleagues. I think it's important.

[01:29:33] Public Works Director Cameron: Appreciate that. Um, What, what I wrote down and heard and then people check if we missed anything. Table three, which is a construction method to see. There is general support. We're silly. So, keep these options on the table. And we get to table for the design qualifications. In general, um, We're all unanimous and not wanting to, um, Do anything that compromises the design. thought went into why we had some of these design elements and it's central to downtown, user experience. The only one we heard where was community member Hicks said, maybe we reduced to tunnel dimensions, but even then less a little. Do we or do we not move? 2% though. My takeaway from this is, um, Let's hold to the design concept that we had. And the user experience. Table 5. Um, everybody seemed to be fine with uh, deferring all these elements and suggestify staff. They could be delivered by the city. Um, There was one question we have heard public comment about the need for the Avalon rap. Staff, which simply suggests that before, what, going to defer it, if we do, which would give us a chance to see what generally is happening in traffic. Um, our primary concern and we would advise additional traffic study before a final decision paid to eliminate. Is this will send all the traffic onto Villa. The Shoreline Villa intersection's already kind of at max capacity and this was to provide an additional way into downtown that would support the businesses as well. And it would also then force all the vehicle crossings headed towards the transit center of using Bella to cross Castro, which is in the middle of the path. So again, you know, It was the more the direct finish of the shoreline using Evelyn. It's, it can just kind of have, just dispersed the traffic a little bit more and not put so much pressure on the fillet. It may work just fine, but we would recommend that. A foresight lemonade. There needs to be more studies. And then, um, moving on to the next questions. Oh, wait, basically, uh, the under process is Central Expressway. Generally, um, No, did not hear any support for deferring both legs under Central. Yeah, seem to be a little, may consider, uh, Let it, you know, deferring the Adobe Tunnel, just having one underdressing, but stronger. Okay. And then, um, the last class set of questions. Um, this is just as I'm closing the funding gap is to continue to look at, um, are there opportunities, increased opportunities to compete for the federal grants, like, um, you know, Cross corridor study, that's what that I complicated, month field. Working for that program when it's ready. Um, and we'll get the delecation of CIP, but the reason we put those 3 funding sources up, but they're the only ones you could use. Most of they eliminate projects. Many of our CIP projects have um, restricted funding sources. You can only use the water fund and server fund on water, except for us. So shoreline fun on projects in North Bay Shore. So, um, When we did a quick glance at it, it really is, uh, by compared projects and other locations, pavement projects. And facilities, you know. So unfortunately, that's why we wrote the staff report that we think that tip, that would work best if we got our gap down to 10 or 15 million. Then we could see some constantly. And then it seemed like everybody agreed that we should go ahead and do this analysis, comparing breakstorm, and Castro and break to counsel that analysis. So, Council, see what it would mean if they wanted to prioritize the 2 separations. And we did pick up the comment of we need to provide more information on. It, it's a try to process. We're different. Great

[01:35:15] Unknown Speaker: summer. Okay. I just want to say I also like, I wanted to 2nd the comments that Ellen made on, um, tying, the things that we defer, you know, the bad news is the cost may go up, but the good news that I said they could tie in. size plan, but I think adding the transit center redevelopment and the pedestrian mall as well, you know, tying so much has changed since you started this project. So, you know, it's not the cost height definitely isn't good, but the ability to maybe rethink some of those things because so much has changed. Maybe we'll end up. Maybe we'll end up being happy also after we get that federal money, all together, we'll just be super happy about this. Great. All right. Thank you very much, Director Cameron, to make members of anything else on this item.

5.2 Transit Center (Castro Street) Grade Separation and Access Project, Project 21-35 - Public Art

[01:36:07] Chair Ellen Kamei: I think this sounds really great. Hopefully. That gives us plenty of to work with with our specific council. Great. Wonderful. All right. And thank you to our partners for joining us and being here to answer questions. I go through this with us, maybe. Um, we we greatly appreciate it. Wonderful. All right. So I think we're going to close this item. We'll bring it to item 5.2, which is the Transit Center, Castro Street, Great Separation Access Project, 21 dash 35 public art. Staff presentation will be provided by Joy, Halloween, senior civil engineer. Thing

[01:36:59] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: again, chair committee members. My name's Joy Howard Senior Civil Engineer in Public Works. And I'm here to provide update on the public art for the transit center grade separation and access project, or as we have been calling it the Castro Street Great Separation Project. Uh, Quake project background. Again, this is a partnership project between Cal Trained, VTA and City. Since the project is a city project, it is subject to city council policy K5, public art SCIP projects, and has a public art budget capped at $400,000. Uh, just a process on the public art on March 8th, 2023 staff engage with official arts committee to provide input on the potential location or locations for public art installation and to discuss requirements for and authorize a call for artists for the project. Staff I then identified for potential locations. The 1st one is the upper concourse area shown in purple. The 2nd is the lower concourse area, shown in green. The 3rd is the cast remain under crossing, shown in blue. And the 4th is the Castro Street Stairway in Yellow. The VAC selected 2 areas for the public art installation, the 1st one is the upper concourse area, the area in purple, and the 2nd is the combination of the castro main undercrossing and the stairway. The VAC also supported a 2 step during process and called for artists in California. After receiving authorization, a call for artists was posted in March of 2023, the 1st round of during on April 6, evaluated and scored artists based on prior art projects, as well as experience with commissioned art. The 6 highest scoring artists were identified and were provided at $1500 stipend to develop a rendering concept for lockup of the proposed art. And in July 2023, all our concept submissions were received. And in August of this year, VAC deliberated and discussed the art received and selected Martha Sacklerout for her proposed art installations of the 2 locations, the upper concourse area, and the combination of the main undercrossing in Castro Stairway. The artist proposed location or proposed artwork for the upper concourse area, is a 12 foot high, 3 dimensional house structure with a 5 foot by 3 foot base that works both as a landmark, and a way finding sculpture. The house structure will be structured as a steel frame. will be constructed as a steel frame that's plaid with a tool of 9 panels. The panels are made from exterior architectural grade materials, including polished stainless steel, construction timber, and panel, powder coated aluminum, digital print, 3D printed wood, Cortis steel panel, and laser cut steel. The artist proposed artwork for the main undercrossing in Castro stairway are collage like neural compositions, featuring various locations and elements with an outline of the city's map in the background of each wall that continues into the staircase area. The mural compositions consists of very size panels mounted on concealed hardware, on steel frame, fixed on the wall. The proposed materials are a combination of powder coated digital photography on aluminum, varnished sealed wood panels, and polished aluminum. Information on the public art pieces are as presented by the artists in the proposal. The project design team will be coordinating and collaborating with the city council approved artists to ensure that the public art installations are supported and complemented by the architectural treatments and in compliance with design codes and regulations. The project team is currently evaluating the project art installation on the stairs to determine if the art can be applied to both the horizontal and vertical elements of the stairs. Next steps, for the art, um, as the project continues to progress, towards 95%, I think council direction in January, um, that will return to the CTC, um, tentatively in spring 2024 to provide architectural design concepts to illustrate the coccusiveness and harmony of the proposed architectural treatments. With the whole heart installations. Happy to hear.

[01:41:50] Public Works Director Cameron: So, we also have John Lang. Economic fatality, manager, correct online. Excellent. I just like it.

[01:42:00] Chair Ellen Kamei: John, did you have anything that you wanted to add before council members have questions? Uh,

[01:42:06] Economic Vitality Manager Lang: no, I think Joy captured uh, the essence of what the VAC looked at. I would just say, oh, I guess the one thing I would add is prior to going out for the call for artist. Um, The public works team did hold a public meeting, um, advance of it in advance of this to try and understand community interest in art. And so the public had already provided some guidance and feedback on the types of art that would be interesting. Um, they did a working Charette, uh, over at the old adobe. And so that also went into the call for artist, as far as looking at different concepts, and we had communicated that through the call for artist proposal. Um, as part of that process. Is that? Is

[01:43:04] Chair Ellen Kamei: that something that the committee can you see? Um, my,

[01:43:10] Economic Vitality Manager Lang: it'll take me a minute to bring it up, but I can bring it up. Uh, really, it was reflecting, um, one of the bigger comments was wanting to reflect some, uh, the history of Mountain View. Uh, which was an important element in the, the call that was called out. Um, And kind of acknowledging, um, mountain view of, of old, not necessary mountain view of new. Um, was a big theme that the residents had noted on different boards, uh, through that Adobe Charette. Um, I will pull up the call for artists in just a minute to further, uh, uh, refine my answer, so just give me a minute. Okay,

[01:43:55] Chair Ellen Kamei: no problem. I mean, I think the committee members might be interested too if you set it at a later point as well. You don't have to, um, but I saw that it wasn't attached. And so, um, just kind of given the, the interest and it being a transit center, colleagues might find it helpful to, to hear directly from the public on what their, um, comments were. Great. Thank you. And thank you for being here. Does any member of the committee have questions? First step. Yes, uh, meeting member manager. Thanks.

[01:44:23] Member Lisa Matichak: Um, I was wondering, we saw just a small portion of the stairs. Um, What was, what is the vision for? How much of the stairs have art, art? If, if that was

[01:44:38] Member Alison Hicks: the art, the map. Like, is it just in a quarter

[01:44:44] Member Lisa Matichak: of the stairs or is it cover 50% or what would we think?

[01:44:51] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: We don't have an area defined in the call for artist, we provided the dimension of the main undercrossing the 24 and it provided the height. Um, and just based on the rendering provided by the artist. It's not covering all of it, but there are still evaluations on what, Art, we can apply whether we should focus on just the horizontal elements or, uh, or if we can do both horizontal portions of the stairs.

[01:45:24] Andy Robbins: I also add that, um, Staff hasn't, um, There

[01:45:29] Daniel Hulse: hasn't been a lot of interaction between the artists and staff. Again, further refinements, once we get into the contract with the artist and start developing it for her. At that point, we want to start that collaboration with identifying area upstairs, but this is just the concepts that were provided. So you're seeing it just exactly has the concept size of the AC on it. Okay. Um,

[01:45:56] Member Lisa Matichak: Do we have the opportunity to see the other concepts that the VAC said? John?

[01:46:09] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: Would you be able to share the slides? Oh, I guess, deliberation meeting.

[01:46:18] Economic Vitality Manager Lang: Yes, just bear with me. If you want to keep up another question, I'll have it up momentarily. I'm just going through the file folders. Okay, great. Um,

[01:46:33] Member Lisa Matichak: I'm trying to separate questions from comments.

[01:46:36] Member Alison Hicks: Okay. I guess one of my questions. I know that the process, uh, that, uh, the process just went through through the visual arts committee was, yeah, correct me if I'm wrong, because I wasn't there for it. So, um, that it was fairly lengthy with presentations from artists. Is that true?

[01:47:03] Economic Vitality Manager Lang: So the way this 2 step during process works, is the 1st step is really evaluating artists specifically on their past history. So there was very little engage direct engagement with the artists. So, uh, the VAC is looking at a portfolio of work. Um, that is submitted by different artists. Uh, they scored all of those portfolios. Uh, we presented those that the ranking and the scoring to the VAC. They talked amongst themselves to see, did any of the scoring need to change or were they generate comfortable and was their consensus about the top scores? From that? 5 or I'm sorry, 6 were invited to, um, uh, move to the next round and as part of that round. Um, there was much more engagement with the artists. Um, and actually, having them, uh, develop a mockup specific around a concept. So giving them detail about. Here are the locations. Here's the interest that, uh, we received from the community and what they would like to see. We provided that to the artists and basically said, these are the parameters. Knowing the locations, what the community feedback was. as part of the call for artists. They develop concepts and models. Um, and then those were submitted to the VAC. The VAC, once again, scored each one of those models. Um, independently. And then, um, as it's now queued up, I can show you what those 6 models and representations were. Um, that the VAC narrowed down to get to, uh, basically Martha's, um, design as the one that stood out most to them. So if you'd like me to show you the 6 uh.

[01:49:12] Member Alison Hicks: So, yeah, I'm just gonna follow up on that, thank you, because I wanted to hear what the whole process was. I wasn't quite on on top of it. So it did include some engagement with the final 6. And I guess my, my only comment, I'll say the rest of my real comment. But is that it's, this is an important area for public art, and there's been a lengthy process, and I don't want to, in any way, truncate that without having the conversations with the artist. But I will look at it. Um,

[01:49:49] Economic Vitality Manager Lang: let me share my screen.

[01:49:58] Economic Vitality Manager Lang: And I hope that's rendering well for everyone. Yes, we see it. Yeah, and it's full screen. Perfect. Thank you. So, um, one of the things, so just to really understand the the detail with which, uh, the, this review was done, because there were 2 locations, as Joy pointed out, there was the, um, the, the landing area as one. And then the 2nd location was the undercrossing, and then the stairwell. So in addition to, um, each proposal, the VAC scored each of the locations independently, so there's an independent score for each location. And then there's a mean score as a proposal. So we gave the artist the opportunity, do you want to bid on just one location? Or do you want to bid on 2 locations? Five of the 6 artists actually submitted proposals for both locations. So when it was a both location, we have a mean score, uh, there is a single artist that chose to design a concept for one location and one location only. Um, and that's represented here. So you can see the range of scoring. And how this played out. Um, this was the leading score. Um, and ultimately was uh, recommended by the VAC to move forward. So these were the concepts that you just saw, as Joy presented. Uh, for Stephen, he was proposing a, um, stylized piece in tile, that this would be, uh, taking, he took pictures of local oak trees and was doing a stylized tile concept that would run along the under, uh, the undercrossing. The next concept was, uh, much more abstract. Um, in terms of the sculpture piece. The sculpture piece was the large structure you see in the middle of the screen, and you can see a concept of what it would look like on the platform versus the undercrossing. Under the undercrossing. Uh, they were taking basically scenery pictures in mountain view. So if you look at the very top left corner, um, that is actually the mountains around Mountain View, with a stylized image over it. Um, is the concept. And then that flowed to the concept of the stairs. And you can see that concept to the middle, left of carrying through that color stylization along those stairs. The next concept was, uh, really focusing on more of a wall treatment on the upper platform. And having this concept of people looking through. So, uh, if you look at the top left image, this would be someone standing on the platform, looking across over to Moffatt. Um, and over looking over um, Central Expressway. Um, underneath, that concept was also going to be put on the walls of having these tubes that had lighting coming out of it and doing a unique lighting treatment in the tunnel. Uh, there was no proposal to actually do the stairs, so it was just the undercrossing. And uh, up on the uh, platform having more of a wall feature. Uh, the, the next artist was proposing 2 sculpture pieces to be near the railings on the upper platform. This would be, uh, done in a metal treatment with a high mirror finished, um, that was a reflection. Um, and then carrying a similar treatment to the undercrossing area, uh, and using a DNA structure that would run through the bottom of the tunnel. And the last concept, um, It's a little bit harder to see, and I apologize, I didn't, um, we had a, uh, a model of this, that really highlighted this, but on the right side, there was a very large statuesque, uh, feature, you can kind of see it to the very top, there, um, but that would be, um, a sculpture that was stand on the uh, platform, and then underneath, Uh, caring for this mural pattern under the undercrossing walls and then take that up the stairwell. And that was the, uh, total of the, the artists that moved through the 2nd round. So this was ultimately what was selected.

[01:55:29] Member Alison Hicks: Thank you I just have one more, and also, this doesn't, so this just shows us the artwork. There's also opportunities, tell me if I'm wrong, for green space, so it doesn't totally show us what we would, what the end result would be. Is that true? Or false. For the undercrusting, there would not be not

[01:56:00] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: free under the tunnel, but in... The concourse areas, there are some opportunities to add landscaping. Um,

[01:56:28] Chair Ellen Kamei: I don't have any questions. Um, so we'll move on to public comment. Would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person, like to provide comment on this item? If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or approach selector. We'll take in-person speakers 1st and each speaker will have 3 minutes and we will put a timer up on the screen. Do you have anyone in person? Just if you don't mind. I'm going to do the timer. There's

[01:57:06] Jessica: some cameras to look at or something for the online people. That's it. Yeah, online people. Okay.

[01:57:13] Jessica: So, hi, I'm Jessica. Um, I'm speaking, um, On behalf of a couple of people. So 1st I have some comments from my vice chair, Susie. Um, she wanted to convey that the concept of the artist we selected evokes a strong sense of place and um, we'll reflect Matthew history, something residents have requested. Um, and to underscore the importance of this project, uh, and its potential to become a focal point of the city. Something that people who live and work around you will see kind of as a gateway to Mount View or even just people coming to shop or here. So you want to make a good impact and it may be something that could define the city. So I want to take that into account. And if the design modifications become a reality, um, Which it seemed like you were kind of leaning away from. But if we were to take away from the overall project in any way, then the art kind of becomes more important and it's relatively inexpensive and it's a good way to enhance the project if you have to make sacrifices elsewhere. I also, um, not sure if the artist is able to join us on Zoom tonight. Um, But she...

[01:58:28] Chair Ellen Kamei: They're welcome to raise their antestate. Yeah. Um,

[01:58:32] Jessica: I'll just, you know, she could reiterate this if she's hearing able to speak, but she's expressed her willingness, um, to be very flexible and work with city council to achieve the best results. In my experience on the VAC, I think she's actually been one of the most flexible artists and the most willing to work with us and go back and forth. So she's, I think she'll be a good partner to work with. She can bring her consultants in to talk about specific materials, et cetera. She lives only 15 minutes away, would love to present to your subcommittee or the full city council. Uh, or just be available to answer questions, um, whether or not she's gonna get tonight specifically. And then kind of from me and the base chair, um, or 2 other channels could use some art too. So, You know, hopefully we get to keep the full scope of the, of the Earth budget, um, and maybe even consider, you know, the, the value of adding some girls together, 2 tunnels, just to kind of make, the entire thing, a comprehensive or experience for people passing through. Um, And that could be a, a, Different artist, you know, if you wanted to. But I would say, you know, if you did want to go with more art than I would, I would do additional and not instead of them, because I think Martha's work is very good. Thank you

[01:59:55] Chair Ellen Kamei: Any other in person, public? How much? All right, we will move on to virtual. We have Bruce England. Hi,

[02:00:06] Bruce England: thank you. I switched headsets so you can hear me okay? Very great. Thank you.

[02:00:12] Bruce England: Bruce England Wisman Station Drive, just for myself at the moment. I, like Jesse was saying, I particularly liked the way that this art and the artist selected reflects Mountain View's background history and all of that. VHC has also been talking about a mission bell project that also reflects the background of the regions. So I like this direction that they're moving in. Um, for the Silicon Valley bicycle coalition, some members, I have some feedback from them. So I want to share that. One is there's great interest in not seeing the budget for this art compromise. We think that art's important as an important place in our community, and we want that to have its own particular stand. So we appreciate not having that compromise. From a safety perspective, however, having the art placed on the stairs themselves really does not seem wise. Even on the vertical faces of those steps. It's going to create a visual distraction for people, but for sure not on the horizontal part. So I hope you'll give some serious consideration to just not putting the art on the stairs themselves, but in adjacent locations only. Thank you.

[02:01:31] Chair Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Valerie Fenwick.

[02:01:39] Valerie Fenwick: Hi, Valerie Fenwick, Bonnie Street, resident of Mountain View. I am on the B pack, but I am not representing the B pack tonight, nor my employer. I want to just echo what was that by Bruce. I really love the art. I think it is really important for creating a sense of place for such an important project. Uh, and I I really enjoy what was picked. I am definitely against, though, any artwork on either the tread or the risers of the stairs. So I think the uh, CTC calling it like vertical versus horizontal. So tread is where you put your foot and the riser is the part that rises. Um, having had a traumatic brain injury myself, visual distortions like that led to more falls when I was walking out in public. I also know, um, I have relatives, um, that are low vision, and friends that are low vision, and that can be very distorting and make, navigating a public space, very difficult. Artwork, on the sides, like the walls of the stairwells or handrails, um, next to would be welcome and appreciated, but any artwork actually on the stairs, um, can be very difficult to traverse, and I think for people with limited vision, and also neurodiversity and traumatic brain injuries or other, uh, non-neurotypical issues. This would be unnecessarily difficult to navigate the stairs and could lead to um, people either avoiding the place or tripping. So thank you for taking that into consideration. Thank you.

[02:03:22] Chair Ellen Kamei: April Webster. Funny, um, if you register.

[02:03:29] April Webster: I'm a long-term resident, Mountain View. I'm sorry, I'm just getting off a plane. But I really value the arts and I wanted to call in and comment. Um, I, as the others mentioned, I think it creates real sense of identity. Um, if, you know, help strengthen the community, and I, I think it's, Joy, and beauty, and I think we're missing that a lot, and, um, just with the, especially in where we live with the hyper focus on STEM and, I think it's really, really important to preserve the art. So I wanted to call in and voice my support for retaining or even increasing the funding for art. I think we need to balance it. Thank you so much for letting me comment. Thank you.

[02:04:21] Chair Ellen Kamei: Hey, last call for in person or virtual speakers on this item. Not seeing any other, so I'll bring this item back to committee members for comments and feedback to staff. Okay. And oh, and then just a note, it's just an informational item, we don't need to take a motion. Um, I just wanted to share. Go ahead.

[02:04:49] Member Alison Hicks: So I have 2 comments. One is that, um, one is that I've been following Martha Sacker's art for a little while, not a lot. But she's amazing and one of the more, I think, professional area artists. I don't, though, think that the what we've gotten in our packets here necessarily reflects our work very well. Um, so I would incur it, and I have heard, although I've heard a lot of people blotting her art. I've also heard people say it's a little dark for a tunnel, and I just want to encourage people to work with her, um, because I think this is only one presentation, uh, and I think she can brighten it up in various ways and work with it. So that's one comment. And then, and, and I would ask that if we, if people are questioning it, we engage with her more. And then the 2nd thing is on the funding, I think that this is possibly, maybe I'll take this back later, but possibly the most important place will have public art in the city. I mean, it is right in the center of the city. And without the art, this is a hole in the ground, and with the art, it could be, you know, a wonderful place. So, I have heard rumors. I know that it's council discretion this, um, $400,000 cap. And I have heard rumors that we may raise it for the public safety building. And I would say if we're going to raise it anywhere, not that I have anything against the public safety building. It's in a place where I walk a lot too. But if we raised it for any one place, I would raise it for, for this place because I guess I'll repeat myself now. Otherwise, it's just a hole in the ground. And that might be a way of working um, with the artist to, um, you know, brighten it up or whatever. Um, and then the last thing I'll say is that I agree with about several, uh, members of the public have said about the stairs being disoriented. So that's something I could And. I think that's all I have. So,

[02:07:04] Chair Ellen Kamei: sorry, just a question. Raising the budget for public art in...

[02:07:09] Member Alison Hicks: No, no, I've heard that it may be that the cap may be that there's some suggestions that it may be lifted there. I think I'm not gonna comment on that either way, but I think if counsel's raising the budget.

[02:07:23] Chair Ellen Kamei: I got the I got that part, I didn't understand the 1st part because I have not heard of any of that. Okay. We just went over it. I don't know if I want to clarify, but I haven't heard. Um, but

[02:07:35] Public Works Director Cameron: the public safety building, my conceptual design will be on the council agenda on December 5th, a packet will be published on Thursday, and there is a discussion of the art budget for that building that included as part of that agenda.

[02:07:52] Chair Ellen Kamei: It's just the art budget, but not necessarily an increase. It's just sympathetic, but there

[02:07:57] Public Works Director Cameron: are an allegation. At this point, there is a proposal staff that counsel increased our budget. Oh, right, I'll just say,

[02:08:06] Member Alison Hicks: over the max, not, up for nine.

[02:08:08] Public Works Director Cameron: The council policy pay for public art. Um, sets the general requirements of staff uses for the relevant capital projects of how to establish art. But, It is a council adopt policy, and therefore, council always has discretion to approve a higher polygard budget or request one. So right now, the way the art policy works is 2% of the hard construction costs of a qualifying capital project. Uh, up to a cap of $400,000, which works out to if you had a $20000000 construction. Budget, that is 400,000. Most of our projects nearly all our projects. All under $20000000 in construction. Um, we recommended the cap. Because, um, if we have just unilaterally applied 2%, which is a higher percentage than other cities have. And you do start to get a 100000000 or 150 million. You could start dating two, three, 4 million, which I realize would be really great for art, but really create even more challenges on funding the project. So staff suggested the cap. It was approved. Um, But it, again, it doesn't do away with counsel's discretion on select projects, uh, right company. Approving a higher art budget. It just, we just need to find the funding point.

[02:10:00] Member Alison Hicks: I think my comment was if we're going to do it there. If we're going to do it anywhere, I would do it here. You can do it everywhere.

[02:10:08] Chair Ellen Kamei: The design that we're seeing is $400,000.

[02:10:12] Public Works Director Cameron: That was that was the budget that was provided to the artist. So was that budget? It is at, I would assume it would work towards budget. Uh, another strategy that was done previously on another pilot. This is always got the one% as opposed to 2%. was when it was done, the selected art was going to cost a little more than one% and It was still doable. So Sid went to council and said, look, we would like to slightly increase the art budget because with the art that was selecting someone, a little bit more money would really make a difference. So that is another approach to this, is work with the artist. And and, you know, towards whatever comments and what we're hearing, like, is our way to brighten it up. different types of materials. And if it turns out that would cost a little more than 400,000, then that could be brought to council to say to really achieve this. We need 500 to 600,000. So that's another way to do it. Okay.

[02:11:16] Chair Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Thanks for the clarification. I haven't heard any of that, but I think that that's on the whole trip. So especially with some of the comments that there's some wiggle room.

[02:11:26] Public Works Director Cameron: I also had curved it at the whole time. Consideration in the fire, art, attention. Special information. Yeah. Mayor

[02:11:34] Member Alison Hicks: gets special information. Yeah. But when I started on council, it was one% and we raised it to 2%. So I'm happy here we have potentially even more flexibility. Um, So, um, I agree that Belgard is very important. I think I've been too vocal about that. And of course, art is very subjective. Kind of like architecture. Um, never forget the architecture discussion we had when I talked about my least favorite building when I said what it was. The council member said, oh, that's my favorite. Um, You know, we all have different perspectives on things. Um, for me, um, I do have some concerns about the selection that has been made. Um, I don't know the artist, sounds like, uh, Just willing to work with folks. Um, but I do think it is too dark. And I feel like I want the, um, this

[02:12:38] Public Works Director Cameron: area to be open and inviting and, and colorful, and,

[02:12:48] Member Alison Hicks: you know, I'm very attractive. And um, for me, this was, it's too dark. I also would like to see things that are less foxy. Um, you know, we talked a lot about architecture, not wanting every single building to be squares and I would say the same thing for art.

[02:13:10] Public Works Director Cameron: I kind of like. Some of the art I really like in the city is right outside here between the CPA and City Hall, uh, the very colorful figures. They're very nice. So I guess I would like

[02:13:30] Member Alison Hicks: something that is less structured, I guess I'd say. Um, and lighter and brighter. Um,

[02:13:39] Public Works Director Cameron: I do appreciate that it is tied to the history of that too and I would like to continue that. Um, I hadn't thought about the stairs before. I think I've been on many stairs where the riser has been painted where tiles or something to make it interesting. And I never had an experience, as was described. On the other hand, my stares at my house, they are a little bit disoriented, because they're all the same color. So I look at the wall to see, you know, where are the steps, because it's a different color. And so I can appreciate that comment. I do think some of the ones we saw were pretty busy and I could see where that would be disoriented. But I also, I'll be very candid. I wasn't crazy about the app on the stairs. And to me, it wasn't obvious that that was a map. Uh, and I'm not sure people would take the time to figure it out. So if we did do something on these stairs, it would need to be more obvious what it is. And I would support uh, having art in other areas like the other tunnels. to make them interesting and hopefully lighter and brighter. Um, and like I said before, this artist is willing to work with us on it. Great. I do want to just mention I'll give out the tunnels under Central Express, like, That is killing right away. And the county has its own art policy and art approval process. And, um, I will say on a prior experience that I had, where art was being proposed by private development that was going to be within county right away. And of course, the county didn't want a maintenance agreement, not a problem. Sign it. Um, when it mentioned it was public art. It raised a lot of red flags at the county execs office and saying, well, now do we need to take it through the county approval process and all of this. So, And that was several years ago, but that is one thing to be aware of is, you put public art in another public agency jurisdiction that has their own art policies. It can complicate things. Well, that was one of the reasons we strongly recommended the concourse, which is JPA. I mean, countering right away and they don't have an art policy or their own process, as well as, um, you know, the concourse, you know, the main concourse area. And the other thing in line is we're still architectural treatments that will add interest and can be tied into the R and make the Telos under Central Express way. Attractive and inviting, without them being official public art, which did trigger the other jurisdictions aren't. So again, we have not talked to the county. I mean, definitely, if there is interest, We can reach out to the county to see if they still have this and what it would be. I just, Remember for this one experience several years ago. It complicated things quite a bit.

[02:17:01] Chair Ellen Kamei: Well, as long as we let the public know that. Those tunnels don't have anything in it. Well,

[02:17:09] Public Works Director Cameron: it will have interest, especially since now you've said you're more interested in kicking those architectural walls. Yeah, that really opens up the door for tile and other treatments of those walls that we could do, just... Okay, great.

5.3 Speed Limit Legislation Overview and Implementation Strategy

[02:17:25] Chair Ellen Kamei: And with that, you know, hopefully, you know, should that be the majority of council feedback in terms of keeping the treatments and the design elements, then maybe we'll have more that we can provide to the artist in terms of understanding kind of what the tunnels will look like with the treatments or, you know, the skylight in particular, or that also appeal to me too because for long stretches. It can feel very dark and florescent lighting. So, you know, how do we kind of create that inviting atmosphere is important. Um, I think my, my colleagues have kind of captured the different, um, related. I do think that, I have openness, I have openness if we have to have wiggle room with the budget. I do think that this is, to me, this is gonna be like the gateway to Mountain View. And I would like the art here to reflect that this is a gateway. And I think that can be done paying a lot to our history while also, um, creating a, um, A sense of place. So I think that, um, you know, some of the images I recognize, like Shoreline or the, you know, old Casher Street or Hanger one, some images, um, I don't recognize. Uh, But I wonder too, and John, I don't know if anybody from the Mountain View Historical Association was also able to participate in the community meeting or give input, but if history was something that came up, hopefully we can incorporate their their input into, um, into the comments of what we create here. Um, but I I think that, Perhaps as as proposed, so things have changed since then, the, uh, uh, the tunnels and, you know, hopefully our future transit centers. So might be worth having a discussion with the artist, what else is coming and how we can create, um, that's a place and, um, maybe what might be tied into other architectural features. So that it feels cohesive, right? I think my concern is that any art that we might fit here. How do we make not make it look hodgepodge, especially if there's multi-jurisdictional or multi-entities or there? Um, how do you still feel like, okay, we're in math view and not like. This side is owned by this entity and this is by that entity. And those are my main concerns, sir. so. Anything else? Colleagues. All right. All right. Well, thank you very much. Really appreciate it. Um, so I think does close as item 5.2. We'll move on to item 5.3, which is speed limit, legislation overview, and implementation strategy. That presentation will be provided by Carla Ochoa, senior traffic engineer. We'll just have a brief moment as we have a staff.

[02:22:32] Public Works Director Cameron: That's one of our already time before next year. Yeah. What on?

[02:23:10] Senior Traffic Engineer Ochoa: Oh, yeah. Good evening. My name's Carlo Choa. a senior traffic engineer of Public Works, and I'll be giving you an overview today. Uh, recent legislation that pertains specifically to setting speed. And I'm doing here by Lorenzo Lopez City Trafficking. Um, I'll start with a background on setting and enforcing speed limits as well as going over some of the provisions of assembly bill 43 in assembly bill 1938. We'll also go over our post implementation strategy. And setting speed limits can get quite complex. I'm going to try to stay away from the technicalities. But obviously happy to answer questions afterwards. There are 2 primary methods of setting speed limits. those that are outlined by the law and also those that are established by a study that we refer to as an engineering and traffic survey. Both of those are regulated by the California Vehicle Code and the California menu of uniform traffic control devices. These are the same legislative and guiding documents that we use for other traffic regulations, including some parking restrictions. Some parking restrictions, um, signage. Allergies. Apologies. Um, we use them for traffic regulations. Um, signage, striping, and rules of the word. The table on the screen outlines when we use the law versus when we need an engineering traffic survey. The top half of the screen, you'll see some of the ones that are more common to drivers, which is, um, the school zone of 25 miles per hours, for example, and local residential roadways. Towards the middle of the screen. You'll see business activity district. That is a recent provisions that was added with AB 43 that gives the cities the option to set speeds at 20 or 25 miles per hour for roadways that meet very specific criteria, and we'll go over exactly what that criteria is in just a bit. And the rest, that encompasses most of the local rest of the roadways, require an engineering and traffic survey. The speed limits that are set by law are very specifically defined in the California vehicle code. The engineering and traffic survey, however, is a study that's maintained that are done and maintained by the city's traffic engineering section and we do data collection and we use a data to do an analysis. to determine what the 85th percentile speed is. And this is the speed app, which 85% of the motorists travel. Uh, we use that and we round. We make, we round the 85th percentile. As allowed by CBC and MUTCD to establish the speed limit. We also use the space feed. This is the 10 mile per hour range that carries the majority of the drivers from that study. We also take into consideration cyclists and pedestrian safety, traffic volumes, and conditions that may not be apparent to drivers. Even with AB 43. A lot of the road waste still require an engineering and traffic survey. The reason being is that these surveys are used primarily to support enforcement, where we measure free flow speed, motorists, and this ensures that the push the speed limits are fair and defensible important. We can't arbitrarily set the speed limit slow, um, because it would potentially create a variation in speed. Excuse. Great operation and speeds and potentially also. Um. Thank you. Oh, that would create a, uh, violators of the majority of the public. Uh. So ultimately, we've set the speed limit compliant with CBC and MUTCD. Um, We have several major roadways that go through a city, but not all of those are our responsibility to maintain the speed survey. For example, on the north end of town, we have NASA, several of those roadways fall under the US Department of Transportation, jurisdiction, we also have freeways, and we have a Comino Real. Those are all state highways, and those are maintained by Caltrace. Similarly, Central Expressway, that is maintained by Santa Clara County, rides and airports department. And while each jurisdiction maintains their surveys, enforcement, police officers generally can enforce anywhere in the state, and they often do collaborative efforts with our new brain. Cities, not just for speed enforcement, but just for general traffic enforcement traffic. And to provide some context on AB 43. This was a, uh, law that was uh, effective January 1st 2022. And it made revisions to the vehicle code anywhere from minor editorial changes all the way to allowing additional reductions that were previously not allowed. As I mentioned before, as well, this brought to us the business activity districts. Um, and while we have more flexibility with the new provisions to lower speed limits, They do still require an engineering and traffic survey for a lot of further. And maybe 1938 came into effect a year later and primarily clarified some of the provisions that were not clear in April. And I've been mentioning, um, engineering a traffic survey, 85th percentile. And so I want to provide an example of how we apply these to the setting the speed limits just to provide some additional context. So in the scenario where we collect data, we calculate the 85th percentile to be 3 or 4 miles per hour, for example, that would fall under that middle, middle row where the rounded speed, the closest rounded speed would be 35 miles per hour. But CBC allows a rounding down in this specific case to 30 miles per hour. But no additional reduction. So in this case, this push this speed limit would be 30 miles per hour. And I've been mentioning the business activity districts. This is one of the few components that does not require an engineering traffic survey, but it does have very specific criteria out wide where the roadways need to need this criteria in order to qualify for the 20 or 25 miles per hour. One of those is a maximum of 4 traffic lanes. The adjacent segments can be no more than 30 miles per hour with the caveat that those that speed limit cannot have been set with other reductions allowed in CBC. It also has to be in a designated downtown or urban village and the roadway has to meet 3 of the falling 4 criteria. One of them is at least half of them. Half of the properties need to be retail, dining commercial uses, and open directly onto the sidewalk. Has to be street parking. And since we're looking, they're looking at shorter blocks for this, the traffic signals or stop signs cannot be more than 600 feet apart. Or have marked pedestrian crosswalks that are not controlled by a traffic symbol. So, as I mentioned, it has to be 3 of these 4 provisions uh, on the right. You'll see an example of San Jose. They established a business activity district in Japan town. I believe this is Jackson Street. We have the parking, you have the retail opening out to the sidewalk. And they met the criteria so they were able to establish a business activity district. Here's another quick example, also in Sausé. Near sound panthers spur on Albadin Avenue. Again, you have the parking, you have the retail opening onto the sidewalk. Establishing the speed limit is A multifaceted approach, and so we kind of broke it down into poor implementation strategy methods. What about being project-based? The most efficient way to reduce speeds is by roadway design, traffic commute measures, and speed management. And so, The goal is to incorporate these these features into capital projects and we've already been doing that on several of the projects. We have Villa, for example, West of Shoreline with several speed bumps. We have Miramonte under design for road diet, as well as several other projects with similar components. And the idea is once these are constructed and they've been implemented for a while, what we would do is go back, resurvey to see if we can qualify for lower speed limits. An example that is counter own, for example, on the image. Um, these Caldero was completed last year with bite blades and feedback signs and so we resurveyed and we were able to reduce the speed limit to 25 miles per hour. One of the provisions that doesn't go into effect until June 30, 2024 is a concept of safety quarters. The safety quarters are very specifically defined in the vehicle code with a new provision and they parallel the high injury network that's being studied as part of the local road safety plan vision 0. And so we plan to include these as part of that study to determine, um, which are the safety quarters that are the highest priority. And then we would go and resurvey the top 3 to determine if they're eligible for additional reductions per the new provision. Similarly, next year, we have, um, the ability to reduce the speed by 5 miles per hour from the 85th percentile on, uh, areas that have high concentration of bicyclists and pedestrians. And this is also very specifically defined in MUTCD. And That goes into effect next year as well. And if the example that we gave earlier were calculated would be 34 miles per hour, we had said 30 would be the closest speed limit. If that corridor, we're studying next year and it were a safety corridor or a quarter that's, uh, in a hype concentration of cyclists or pedestrian area, then we would be able to reduce an additional 5 miles per hour to 25. And the 4th element is the business activity district. Um, our goal is to try to identify, see if any amount, any segments, and now we do qualify for business activity districts. I've done a high level overview. There will probably be very limited amount that qualify, as you saw, there's several restrictions or criteria that they have to meet in order to piece that at 2025 without an engineering and traffic survey. Last month, we took the same presentation to the bicycle, the pedestrian advisory committee, and they can supported our efforts to include speed management, traffic calming measures into capital projects, and public improvement projects. They also had us asked us to inquire the city of Palo Alto and their efforts, I believe, was last year. They had seen some reductions. I did reach out to them and they, 2021 I believe it was that they, um, had to establish several lower school speed limits, which we have already in Bellevue. And, um, they also, it just like any other jurisdiction, any speed limit that's enforceable is supported by initiated topics, really. So our goal is to move forward with this implementation strategy. And, uh, do reductions where we're allowed by CDC and then you tasted me. Thank you. Um, that

[02:36:21] Member Lisa Matichak: you never have questions. Just do you have any, um, street segments that you've already kind of pre-identified that might be likely? Or business activity districts? For that or for, um, the safety corridors, or I think that's what's happening. So

[02:36:40] Senior Traffic Engineer Ochoa: the business activity districts. Um, no, I haven't been able to find. I've focused outside of downtown. No. My focus will be toured onto the downtown area. Um, and even then those segments would be limited, as you saw, one of the components is. One of the components. Is that at least half of the properties need to be retail or commercial? I mean, sorry, retail or dining commercial uses, and they have to open directly up to the sidewalk. And so it'll really will limit the segments that will be able to allow. As for safety quarters. Um, the local receiver plan is ongoing, so those haven't been identified. Okay,

[02:37:27] Member Lisa Matichak: so um, following on that. Uh, on page 5, the step court comes about looking at the safety corridors for the highest

[02:37:36] Public Works Director Cameron: prioritization score. And so I was wondering, Do we not know how many they are? Yeah. No, it'll... Well, through the vision 0 initial planning process, we have identified the high injury network. Um, again, I find it. I was looking online for it. Yeah, I went to, it went to council a few years ago when council adopted the vision sale, OLC, and it, you know, it used to be looked at and updated because it's based upon where you have your highest portion of severe injury and fatalities. Um, There are, there's, there's, there's quite, they're the main corners, as you would imagine, alchemic princess is definitely one. Um, We are here, she prevail, just list them all for you. Um, one of the reasons it was suggested start with the 3 highest priority quarters is some of these quarters are very long and we're breaking into segments because what might work for a portion of the corridor, like different for another portion and so on. So that's one consideration. The other is it really does take staff time and effort to do the engineering and traffic surveys. So there's really only so many of them that can be done at once. So, again, at least on the safety corridors is start with the 3 highest priority. Let's get through the studies, the surveys that need to be done. They can make a recommendation on whether speed numbers can be lowered there based upon the criteria can be set. And then from there, can move on to the next set, unless they do color. Again, um, The local room, safety plan, ambition zero, actual plan is to come to council here in early 2024, March or so, at that point, also will be asked. This looks like what our city corners are, and that will give us our jumping off place. And since, This legislation for the safety quarters is not effective into July 1st, 2024. The time you will work. We'll know what they are. Yeah, I know it's starting on the top three. Does El Camino have the same? It's the limit throughout the entire public. As I recall, there's a portion of El Camino that is something like 45 or another portion of something like.

[02:40:24] Andy Robbins: It does change.

[02:40:25] Public Works Director Cameron: Somewhat. I don't remember which segment.

[02:40:28] Member Lisa Matichak: We didn't mount it? Yes, and within now, just... And so if, I mean, I do come out, I'll open up this one. It's

[02:40:39] Public Works Director Cameron: probably one of the top three. Do

[02:40:42] Member Lisa Matichak: we work, then, with a

[02:40:43] Public Works Director Cameron: conference on that? Or do we have jurisdiction or freedom? It's

[02:40:48] Chair Ellen Kamei: all contracts, jurisdiction. Do we do the study? No, they do all the studies, do they set the speaker if

[02:40:54] Member Lisa Matichak: they make the decision in a circle? Can we, but we can go to them and say, This is where there's been a lot of collisions and we want you to take a look at the speed limit or. We can't.

[02:41:08] Senior Traffic Engineer Ochoa: One thing to keep in mind is actually that someone's in provisions and I don't remember which ones specifically that were implemented that were introduced as part of AD43 actually do not apply to state highways. And that would be able to be done. So I'm not sure if exactly the safety quarter would be one of them, but that's how it is written.

[02:41:28] Public Works Director Cameron: I will say that, the encomino project coming up or repaving and adding the bike a pet. Um, with the bulk port of bullbouts for asking me to be added and so on. It is an example where design changes are being made that we're hopefully helping actually slow the traffic, yeah. And

[02:41:48] Senior Traffic Engineer Ochoa: I'd have to go back and wait as well. Exactly the definition of safety quarter, but I believe it falls within each jurisdiction. So, How can we know we're not fall under our network or specifically for safety order definition? Or.

[02:42:06] Unknown Speaker: Can I clarify that? You mean, if a street, even on a local street? We went from Mount View to Palo Alto, we still wouldn't, we'd be able to do the portion that's in there. Yeah,

[02:42:17] Senior Traffic Engineer Ochoa: it's just El Camino real is entirely, Caltrans, it's not it within a jurisdiction, it seems to be. So we can't do El Camino.

[02:42:24] Public Works Director Cameron: We can't do such Express. Yeah. Um,

[02:42:36] Chair Ellen Kamei: Thank you. I don't have any questions either. So we'll move on to public comment. Would any member of the public journey is virtually or in person like to provide comment on this item? If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or approach the lectern. We'll take in person first, but I'm not seeing any public. So I'll move to virtual and we'll pull up our 3 minute timer and we have Bruce England. Give me one moment, Bruce. We're getting the timer. There we go. There we go. Thank

[02:43:25] Bruce England: you. Um, yeah, for a single and Whisman Station Drive with some input again from Silicon Valley, Bicycle Coalition members and Mountain View Coalition for Sustainable Planning members too. Um, Just speaking of being frank, from my own position on this, it's very frustrating to be a person in Mountain View, who does all modes of travel, um, or at least the 3 main ones, we can take transit out of it. I drive, I bike, I walk. And when I see the way people drive, frankly, Not much is enforced anyway. You know, people are tailgating, they're driving way too fast. We still have the stretch of Dana by Landell's school, signed for 35 miles an hour. And I, while I hear the argument. that it's not enforceable if we artificially lower speed limits, I would rather do be more progressive on this and really move towards signing at lower speeds, even if you think it's going to be not enforceable and just see what happens, if other cities are able to do this to some extent, I would like to see Mountain View do it too. Now, if it can't be done because the laws and the rules won't allow it, then that's fine. But where there is any wiggle room at all, um, to move ahead on this and to help us realize our vision 0 goals, I'm all for it. Anything above 30 miles an hour is going to lead to serious injury and death on our roads for people who are walking and biking, and that's just really not acceptable. And so I'm speaking strongly about this because I feel strongly about it. I know that other members of the community do as well. So I hope you'll give this, um, ample consideration. Thank you. You.

[02:45:22] Chair Ellen Kamei: That concludes our public, um, comments. So I'll bring the item back for committee members and feedback to staff and um, no motion is needed. Um, just any comments or feedback to staff on implementation strategy or maybe areas for staff to look at, um, would be helpful. Oh, the clarified question. I can't

[02:45:48] Unknown Speaker: remember where I read this quite a bit, uh, an email we got, that they said Palo Radz would just arbitrarily lowered

[02:45:54] Public Works Director Cameron: across the board, but you said you checked with Palo Alto and they actually did traffic studies. Uh, for the areas where they lowered the speed level. Did

[02:46:02] Chair Ellen Kamei: I know that, right? So where,

[02:46:04] Senior Traffic Engineer Ochoa: no, so where it's enforceable, they do have speeds are based. And they do have speeds above 25. They have a few segments start 25. Um, I didn't get until the details of what, you know, they were the whole process, um, but where it's enforceable to have speed surveys and they don't universally have 25 mile per hour speed limit

[02:46:28] Public Works Director Cameron: across all the city streets. So where it's

[02:46:32] Unknown Speaker: not enforceable, they could have lowered the speed limit, and that it's not enforceable because they didn't do a traffic search. Yeah. Potentially. Um We may not have caught this on her

[02:46:46] Public Works Director Cameron: initial slide where she talked about speed limit set by law, right? Where you can just say, you don't need the engineering traffic survey, it determines. The piece where you need the engineering traffic survey, with some exceptions, most roads, therefore, by default, is if you do not do an engineering and traffic survey to establish a lower speed limit, the default speed limit is what, 50 or 5 or 65. Right. So, this is, um, those here to be. No, we don't, but that's the point is that if the roadway itself doesn't qualify as just a speed limit set by law. Yeah. And you don't do an engineering and traffic survey to establish a lower speed limit, the default speed limit that

[02:47:40] Senior Traffic Engineer Ochoa: is 50 or 55. And so that opens it up for PD not being able to enforce a 50 mile per hour speed for dealing with speed taco streets. Uh, Well,

[02:47:56] Unknown Speaker: some people do speed around here. I find the more concerning

[02:48:01] Public Works Director Cameron: behavior is just not stopping the stop signs. Um, Tailgating, uh,

[02:48:09] Unknown Speaker: doing all kinds of crazy things rather than speeding, and I think, oh, my God. I

[02:48:15] Chair Ellen Kamei: saw a car start. I saw a car today driving through Piner Park. Here. Yeah, right here, the park for, yeah, right here. On the park, what? Yeah, driving driving on a walkway. And I thought, to myself. What is happening? Why did they accidentally drive? Somewhere that they think this walk away. Anyway, sorry, I just had to share. I couldn't see that to myself. I'm

[02:48:45] Unknown Speaker: a hitchy trail. I think somebody must have come out of their house and turned too soon and gone on the trail as opposed to a little bit further, gone on the road. And they get to the end of the travelers followers. Um, I was quite sure how they think it that loud. Um, but anyway, I, um, I think a lot of people had high hopes for, um, the laws changing and therefore major changes, but I appreciate the way you are approaching this. Um, certainly all the new projects we've seen, um, are very different, uh, in terms of the configuration road and what's happening. Fairchild's one I'm on quite a bit by that. Oh, this has certainly changed. Um, I definitely appreciate the temporary, um, what they're called, like, group groups? Yes, rubber groups. Thank you. Um, to make it, uh, so people just don't slide around that corner from Wisbon onto Fairchild. Right? They actually stop them. It's great. So engineering of our streets really works. Um, so I do appreciate and I wouldn't change any of this. I'm anxious to hear, though. Um, vision

[02:49:59] Public Works Director Cameron: 0 and a high... Yeah, which is... Yes, yes. Thank you. Appreciate this. Yep,

[02:50:15] Unknown Speaker: I support your efforts to include reduced speed limits and projects. And I generally support lowering, um, speed limits where possible and on neighborhood streets. Um, because I think in many places as we densify, there's cutthrough traffic, you know, with people with ways and so forth. trying to get to office on time and not realizing they're even going through a neighborhood. So I know with my neighbors, there's a lot of interest in lowered speed limits. Um, and it does make a huge difference, you know, whether you're, I guess, we were emailed, somebody emailed us showing. Uh, when people are hit at 40 miles an hour, 90% of them die, whereas if you're hit at 20 miles an hour, only 10%. So that's a big difference. And so I, I generally support moving in that direction. So,

[02:51:12] Chair Ellen Kamei: um, I think that while, thanks for the update, I think, um, it was really helpful to hear while it might, you know, encouraging that it may be 43 allows for this business activity district, if it's given our our city, as you mentioned, it's not going to be something that we're going to have, um, You know, we might so like qualify for or 5 laws or really in the in the E and CS category, I feel like for a lot of these issues, it sounds like. But one of the things that I know just recently passed by the governor, I was looking up the film number, was AB645. That's the automatic speed camera bill. I know that some of the jurisdictions are piloting. it's like, you know, Santa Fe. Olympic cities, of course. But, you know, if I think given, um, that we have a legislative team now, could that be a bill that we might be able to hobby for expansion of so that we can also have that as an enforcement mechanism? It's, you know, helps, um, track the label is beat and then they, it's an enforcement because they generate fines as well. So it could be anyways, I don't know if that. have the kind of the details of that for other jurisdictions, but, you know, kind of to address some of these issues, right? If that's a good,

[02:52:40] Public Works Director Cameron: we'll get to do with our RPH group. So as I recall, um, at near the beginning of each calendar year, city manager's office brings forward legislative priorities. So, um, that, that could be, yes. for, I think, you know, want feedback from police department and others on this, that would be the best mechanism, that that's something, the whole council. I just have a question of clarification. Are you saying

[02:53:16] Unknown Speaker: when you say other cities do this just for monitoring, but there's no enforcement allowed? No, there is. a governor just signed it. It's October.

[02:53:24] Public Works Director Cameron: pilot program. It's a pilot program. Certain cities. automatic

[02:53:30] Unknown Speaker: programming that you want to expand. Well,

[02:53:33] Public Works Director Cameron: or see if Mount Butte could become...

[02:53:37] Chair Ellen Kamei: Okay, yeah. Yeah. Or, yeah. As we're, it's just a comment and feedback to staff is just something that I've noticed that might be helpful for someone. Yeah, that's huge. I didn't understand it was a pilot. Yeah. But it's the pilot cities are San Jose, San Francisco, Oakland, and I think 3 of them. I don't know, you know, the others, but I was just following that because the city of San Jose advocated for that bill and to be part of the pilot, and that's how that went forward by understanding is from their department

[02:54:10] Public Works Director Cameron: transportation. Just, you know, how much they, um, pay to be part of the pilot to have the equipment. That would be part of the question. Or

[02:54:22] Chair Ellen Kamei: would you just do certain intersections? Right? I don't.

[02:54:27] Public Works Director Cameron: Very good question. We'd have to really dive into it. Understand. Yeah,

[02:54:32] Chair Ellen Kamei: but maybe if we can...

[02:54:33] Public Works Director Cameron: Yeah. Is it possible? Or,

[02:54:36] Chair Ellen Kamei: you know, as we're looking to be the priority for is as part of our vision 0 and our safe routes to school, right? I would really want to be making sure that we're prioritizing the I, you know,

[02:54:51] Public Works Director Cameron: So I'll bring this up with city manager's office because right now they are serving the department heads on the legislative priorities last year's for changes, I'll let them know there was interest in this one. So if it might help, I think. But like I said, in terms of working with our lobbyists and so on, They do base it upon that adopted legislative priority, like cancel.

6.1 Staff Comments

[02:55:20] Chair Ellen Kamei: Any other comments or feedback to staff? All right, thank you, Steph. We'll move on to item 6, which is our committee, staff announcements, updates, requests that committee reports. Item 6.one. is to have comments done. Cameron Public Works director will provide some staff comments. Thank

[02:55:36] Public Works Director Cameron: you, and I know this has been quite a meeting. I appreciate everybody. We've had 4 meetings this year. I think that will continue. I wanted to just, um, I talk about a lot of things, but let me just focus on, as you know right now. Uh, we are. you know, working on the inter-captural pet mall with some of the inter-move improvements. It's been a bit challenging. You know, we delayed some of this paved network because the businesses did not want to move off the street during their peak season and then it was, can't we stay for art and wine festival than it was? Can't we stay for Halloween? Granted, our contractor also had delays, so we were able to make it work, but what it did run into then was colder weather, winter weather. More wet weather, making it more challenging to put down a pavement seal. Um, managed to get it done and then you may have seen all the public comments of it's already been decorated. There's a lot of footprints in certain areas because people ignored the caution tape and across the street anyhow. We will shortly be doing some cleanup work where the footprints, working on that, and the new outdoor patio barriers can go in after that. So, you know, weather has delayed us a little bit, but it still looks like in the next couple weeks, you'll start seeing the 1st set of patio barriers go up. 14 businesses that are ready to execute the licenses. They met all the requirements. But there are another 20 in the works. So they'll be rolling out. I bring this up because one of the pieces we're not implemented yet. is some kind of decorative treatment for the central walkway. So right now it's just going to be delineated by white lines. We've been working up concepts for painted, decorated treatments. Part of our goals have been, whatever is done out there has to be something we can maintain with our own staff. You know, because it's going to be pain, it will fade. We have to keep going out refreshing. Um, Visual arts committee has just agreed to have a special meeting in January so we can break forward a couple concepts to them. We were timing it so that that's on your next agenda. So after we go to visual arts, we'll bring to you what we think could be some options out there because we want to put them in place in the spring. Yeah. Okay. No, I think I'll just, uh, I just want to generate interest for coming to the January 30. Our

7. ADJOURNMENT

[02:58:26] Chair Ellen Kamei: interest is Pete. Okay, so we don't get a comment. I know 6.2, our committee comments. Do any committee members have comments or reports to share with? Um, let's see. Would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person like to provide a comment on this item? If so, please clip the raise hand button in soup or approach the lecture. We'll take in-person speakers first. I've got speed at eight. All right, so then move on to item seven, which is our adjournment. Thanks so much for joining us. Our next council transportation committee meeting will be held on January 30th, 2024. This meeting is adjourned at 9.34 PM.

• ← Previous
• Next →