Sept. 2, 2025 Council Transportation Committee

Video

Agenda

Speaker Summary

(16 speakers)
SpeakerWordsTime
Chair John McAlister4,84634m
Assistant City Manager Cameron1,0437m
Member Alison Hicks2,56119m
Senior Civil Engineer Houghton2,23317m
Associate Civil Engineer Hoang1,66914m
Assistant Public Works Director Boyer1,97312m
Member Ellen Kamei1,77811m
Transportation Planner Ahmed1,2838m
Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales1,2967m
April Webster1,1056m
Unknown Speaker7754m
Silja Paymer8544m
Mary Dateo7084m
John Scarborough6533m
Public Works Director Ng3422m
Assistant Public Works Director Arango1871m

Transcript

[00:00:13] Chair John McAlister: No, you can't help. John, are you up there? One last call to John.

[00:00:27] Transportation Planner Ahmed: So his hand went down. Okay,

[00:00:29] Chair John McAlister: so then we will go on to...

[00:00:34] Transportation Planner Ahmed: Okay.

4.1 Approve Meeting Minutes

[00:00:37] Chair John McAlister: If we get back to him later, we'll try. We'll close public comment. Oral communication and move on to item number four. Consent, 4.one improved mediate meeting minutes. With the minutes for April the first, 2025 meetings are present for approval tonight. With any member of the public joining us virtually or in person, like to provide comment on the minutes. If so, please click the raised hand button and zoom or approach the electrum. We will take in-person speakers first. Each speaker will have 3 minutes. Anybody in the audience here would like to comment on the minutes. Anybody, virtually, would like to talk on the minutes. Okay, seeing no comments. Thank you. I will now bring the item back for committee deliberation action. Are there any corrections or comments on the minutes? Fellow members? No. Oh, do I hear a motion? Must them. Second. So moved. Uh roll call, please. Go.

[00:01:50] Public Works Director Ng: Are we putting my, by racing?

[00:01:52] Chair John McAlister: I get well, because we're doing virtual, right? So we have to. Otherwise, I say it was an M. Sorry I missed what you said. Okay, since we're going virtual, and I thought you'd have to raise no rule call. Oh, okay. Are you looking for me to do that? Um, I can do it, no, was that? Yeah, you're independence. I don't just ramrod it. So would you please take a roll call vote? Am I correct, Mayor? I'm going to go. You can do, I think,

[00:02:27] Member Ellen Kamei: but it's usually the director that does the. Okay. Uh, Am

[00:02:34] Public Works Director Ng: I calling individual names? Yeah. Okay. Um, Jeremy McAllister. Yeah,

[00:02:41] Chair John McAlister: I go in favor of the motion.

[00:02:46] Public Works Director Ng: Committee members come on?

[00:02:48] Member Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[00:02:49] Public Works Director Ng: And Canadian member Hicks.

[00:02:50] Member Alison Hicks: Yes.

[00:02:51] Public Works Director Ng: 3 yeses. Okay,

5.1 Miramonte Avenue Complete Streets Study, Project 23-31

[00:02:53] Chair John McAlister: motion, and voted by, raised 10? Oh, okay. I just read raised hands. Okay, we will make this thing a little quicker. New business, Miramani as a complete street project 23.3.3. This is the item, uh, 95.one is the Mirman, yeah, what complete streets project 23.31. The staff presentation will be provided by Alison Boyer, assistant public works director. All right, you can, I'm sorry? And

[00:03:22] Assistant City Manager Cameron: Cher, do you have an announcement?

[00:03:23] Chair John McAlister: I do have an announcement to make. Do, to my Baskin-Robbins locations. With no a determine distance. I will need to recuse myself or any potential conflict on this particular Qaeda. So therefore, I will adjourn to the audience, oh, be pointing to the... Yes. And your room has this will continue. And

[00:03:53] Member Alison Hicks: who will be chairing in your absence?

[00:03:55] Chair John McAlister: I would think the senior member would be maybe Alison. Okay, by Alison? And I will be notified when it is over. Hey,

[00:04:09] Member Alison Hicks: I'm glad to find out how senior I am. Teenage boxes.

[00:04:16] Chair John McAlister: Well, I am blind as it is, though. Okay. Well, might as well take them. Oh, I have a badge. Good goodness. stupid.

[00:04:27] Member Alison Hicks: Okay, so while committee member McAllister, Chair McAllister is walking out, we are now on item 5 new business. 5. one is Miramonte Avenue, complete street study, project 2331. Um, And we are, so this is, the staff presentation will be provided by Alison Voyer, assistant public works director, and Coyote Ahmed, transportation planner will be available to answer questions after the presentation.

[00:05:04] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: Thank you and good evening. Again, I'm Alison Boyer. I am the assistant Public Works director, and I have clearly Amid next to me, and she'll help with the presentation here. So today we're here to talk about the Miramonte Complete Streets project, the recommendation. We are have before you is to review and recommend the preferred alternative concept plan for Miramonte Avenue Complete Streets Study, Project 2331 from El Camino Real to Castro Street, Maryland, segment A to city council. Miramonte has been split into 3 segments, segment A, B, M, C. segment B is currently under design and construction and is expected to begin shortly. Segment A and C are included in the study we are covering today. And this was funded with 2016 BTA measure B funds. We are focusing on segment A, since it is due for paving and we are looking to do this work with that paving project. Some quick. background on where we're at in the schedule here. Last year, we kicked off the study with data collection and outreach round one. Since then, we have completed preliminary concept design, data analysis, outreach round 2, and a preferred alter and developed a preferred alternative. Today we are here to receive your feedback on the preferred alternative. And based on the BPAC and CTC feedback we receive. We are planning to bring a final report to council at the end of the year. So, um, and have a, a, have that be ready for design with the design team as they move forward with the Pavement project. With that, that's not the prudy.

[00:06:48] Transportation Planner Ahmed: Thank you. Uh, PO damn it, and I'll be providing um, portion of this presentation. So a little bit on the background. The goal of the study is to improve safety, accessibility, connectivity, and increased transportation option on Miramonte Avenue. Which supports cities vision 0 policy, which aims to achieve vision, 0 fatal collisions by 2030 and cities safe for us to school program. Since this corridor provides access to St. Joseph, Grand Middle School, and above elementary school. As Allison mentioned, this is a planning study for segment A and second C. We kicked out the study last fall with outreach round one and studied data collection. For outreach round one, we conducted bike and walk audit, interactive map survey, and an open house. And through this outreach, we received valuable feedback, and improvement ideas for this corridor. In parallel, we also conducted Octora data collection, which included traffic counts, speed, traffic collision, parking counts, and field observation. Data collection, traffic data collection, and parking utilization is included in your packet as attachment attachment seat. Based on the data collection analysis, staff kicked off outreach round 2 during summer. During this round of outreach, staff saw feedback on proposed parking removal, proposed travel lien reduction, and bike and pedestrian facilities along the corridor. During Acmitron 2, we have taken these elements for public feedback. Public outreach events included study survey, pop-ups at nearby schools. The outreach notification included sending postcards to residents, car flyer, yardside, traffic light pole flyer, and social media post. Through outreach, we heard support for protected bikeways and pedestrian safety features. In the survey that closed last Friday, showed that over 55% of survey respondents supported this plan, and of the respondent that opposed the plan responded that preserving a travel lane would be the reason. One key element of this plan is on on street parking removal proposal, which is based on 7 day data collection over different time period around the clock. The proposed parking removal map, shared for feedback near with nearby schools and corridor residents. Um, this map includes the 3 yellow circles that you see in the screen shows where the where the parking removal is proposed, which is on the west side of the street, where we found minimal parking demand and more parking demand on the east side of the street. The 2nd element of the preferred alternative footprint concept plan is travel lane reduction from 2 lane to one lane. This is this proposal is based on low traffic volume and delay a lot delayed analysis along this corridor. The analysis was done through using highway capacity manual 2000 methodology. Approximately 64% of server respondents supported, proposed, and additional parking removal. Survey respondents also identified additional treatments which included new and improved pedestrian crossing, traffic coming measure, and increased street, uh, street streetscaping, and improved street lighting. This plan include these treatment through mid-block crossing, with rectangle, rapid, flashing beacons, uh, signs, traffic calming measure through production of traveling, and varier protected bikeways. This plan is also reserving space for Green Street for future if funding becomes available. Now to the preferred concept plan. Uh, this segment shows from El Camino to south of East Park Drive, as you can see, we have varier protected bikeway going southbound. And parking protected bike going northbound. We also have a midblock crossing with ROFB and dash line through the complex zone. This segment shows from hard drive to trophy die drive. Again, on going on the west side of the street. We have barrier protected bikeway. On the east side, we have parking protected bikeway. We have high visibility crosswalk at Sonia. And midblock crossing at Trophy Street with RRFBs. And we also have great dash line through the conflict zone. The last segment is from Trumpy to Maryland Drive slash Pastro. And we have very protected bike way. Parking protected bikeway, high visibility crosswalk, and dashed line through the conflict zones. To zoom in a bit more. Um, one of the element is the parking lane reduction, and this map shows from ECR to part drive where it will be vertical, vertical barrier protected and parking protected. Vehicle lane is 11 feet and buffer and bike lane would be determined in the design phase. This segment also shows part just south of Sonia, where it is vertical, vertical barrier protected on both sides. And the vehicle lane is 11 feet with buffer and bike lane would be determined in the design phase. And this is the last segment that shows from Rankin to Castro. It has the parking protected and barrier protected, and the vehicle lane would be 11 feet with buffer and bike lane would be determined in the design phase. An alternative option to consider keeping the existing, which is keeping the existing bike lane configuration. In this configuration, parking is along the curb. Bike lane and traveling, a bike lane, and then will be travel fee. This configuration will preserve 8 existing parking spaces compared to the preferred concept plan. The trade-off here would be keeping parking would be increased conflict points between bicyclists and drivers. The safer option would be to have it as parking protected bikeway, and according to federal highway administration, protected bikeway will reduce vehicle to bike conflict by 53%, which is shown in the previous slide. So

[00:13:15] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: we went to BPAC last. Wednesday. And we heard unanimously from BPAC that they also recommended the, they recommended the staff recommendation to CTC to, um, and the motion pass unanimously. Um, the BPAC comments we heard were exploring loading area opportunities along the corridor. Consider additional midblock crossing at El Camino Real and West Park Drive. Consider a bidirectional bike lane from Mirror Monte Avenue and the maintenance alleyway at Mirror Monte and East Park Drive, and that's located in front of the ballpark. Um, consider adding walkways along the corridor. I'm sorry, adding crosswalks along the corridor, and, uh, restricting right turn on red, explore shortening, turn radio links were feasible to slow vehicles, crossing the bike lane, and explore options to shorten and improve the merge transition between segment A and B for greater cohesion. So what's coming next? So we finished our community outreach in round two, with your recommended with a preferred alternative recommendation. From here, we'll move to going to council in fall 2025 and then the design team will kick off the design for segment A. So, The recommendation here. Before you is to review and recommend the preferred alternative concept plan for the Miramonte Avenue Complete Street Study, project 2331 from El Camino Real to Castro Street, Maryland Drive, segment A to city council. Thank you, Sid. Thank you. So,

[00:14:58] Member Alison Hicks: um, is anyone basically being there, do you have any questions?

[00:15:06] Member Ellen Kamei: Thank you. Thanks, thanks to staff for the report. I noted a few frames that I have downloaded. So, I, and then, I was wondering if there, and I, I know that there's, like, attachments, is there a total number of those who provided input? So I saw like surveys with the pop-ups. I saw the percentages, but like, how many people in total with all the different, um, methods? Do you think you spoke to? Um,

[00:15:42] Transportation Planner Ahmed: I would say over 400 is like 12? Yeah. Yeah, over 400. So with the orientation, back to school nights and the survey, we have over 400 respondents.

[00:15:53] Member Ellen Kamei: Okay, so for number one, it's a study survey, 438 respondents. That's for everything. I thought that was just for the service. Sorry,

[00:16:00] Transportation Planner Ahmed: sorry, over 500. I Okay, so that's the iPad.

[00:16:03] Member Ellen Kamei: Yes. Um, Okay, great. And what do you, and I think, you know, 55%. of people and have responded. Is there other things that you all did differently that you felt really helped or it seems like there was really good engagement? So I was just curious on maybe what worked and what we can, what we can maybe as counsel can ask as we're

[00:16:28] Transportation Planner Ahmed: doing engagement, you know? Yeah, I think the 2 thing that really comes to mind. One is yard size. Yard science are our... Yeah, with the QR code, very high engagement. Walking their dog, taking the kids to school. That's where we get a lot of... Very high engagement and pop-ups. We did back to school night for Bob and Graham, and we also did our orientation with Mountain View Lisbon District, and it was we would scan it, and then a lot of the students actually would take it with us, and they would ask, like, what does this mean? So, At hand, we kind of showed how to take the survey. You know, it's a planning survey, so there is educational part and you take the survey, so it was it was really nice to kind of walk people through that.

[00:17:11] Member Ellen Kamei: Okay. And that was going to be the 2nd part of my question was trying to understand the data. It's not, you know, this aggregated per se. So just wondering, like, Everyone is a user and sorry if I missed it somewhere in the documents, is there a way to know if it's an actual user or actual abuse?

[00:17:33] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: We do have that information. I don't know that we provided it in the report, but we can get. Oh, we did ask how, how are they, how do they relate to Mir Monte? Where do they live there? Do they travel there? Are they just a resident in mountain view? So we do have all of that data and we can provide that if that's the

[00:17:50] Member Ellen Kamei: only reason I ask that is just curious on how, understanding how they, how they use it and if the things were proposing or what they want. So that, that's just why I'm asking. However, Steph wants to present that when it comes to the full control would be really great. The full report. Yeah.

[00:18:08] Member Alison Hicks: Just I may, if you remember, if you're off the top of your head, have a guest. If not, don't feel free.

[00:18:15] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: A majority were either lived along the corridor or raising it for school. Yep. That's the mature.

[00:18:20] Member Ellen Kamei: All right. So not only do we have the high engagement, but it's actually people who are using that. avenue. Okay. And... And

[00:18:31] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: what Coyote was saying is we went when they did the pop-ups, they came with the iPad. So they were taking the survey there. So that's part of those numbers. So maybe that's part of the engagement if you actually had it there for them to do it right away. Okay.

[00:18:46] Member Ellen Kamei: And then a question. Um, about sign 19 related to high visitor crosswalks. So, um, when we do the high visibility class, I know that's kind of like one measure, but we can also do high visibility crosswalks with like the flashy lights, another. So is that included when we say high visibility crosswalk or is that another type of traffic analysis with which we have to do to include kind of the flashing, um, sign. Sorry, I don't know the text. So we, RFB,

[00:19:19] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: thank you. RRFBs are called out, it's specific locations. So we do have 2 of those included on the project. There's one between El Camino and Park, and then there's another one closer to... uh on trophy. Yeah. Okay, trophy. Sorry, it was hard for me to

[00:19:36] Member Ellen Kamei: totally tell in the visuals.

[00:19:40] Transportation Planner Ahmed: Yes, this one is with ROFB. That would be a new one and on park. That's an existing one and we are going to put an RRFB there to increase physibility. Oh, right here. They're

[00:19:52] Member Ellen Kamei: mid block crossing. Okay, sorry. So at McKelby, there's the mid block. And you're gonna, you will install. Put that, put that. Okay, because it doesn't exist from what I recall, right? Okay. So there, and then I'm sorry, on the trophy, on trophy. Yeah. So it will pop up. Right there. But not at Sonia. So now...

[00:20:14] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: Uh, Sonia has a traffic light, so it doesn't, so it already has a controlled, um, pedestrian button. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Sorry. Okay.

[00:20:24] Member Ellen Kamei: trying to orient myself.

[00:20:25] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: Yeah, so the RRRFBs are added usually for those mid-block where there's not a signal. Okay, great.

[00:20:34] Member Alison Hicks: Thank you. Those are my machines. Okay, those are health problems. Um, So my questions are, um, First remind me, the BPAC comments, they, um, they did recommend the staff recommendation, and also, the additional comments they made are all, are they all explore and consider, they're none that are, Yeah, definitely do. Okay. Yeah. Just wanted to make sure. And then you explain the bi-directional bike way a little more to make us out. Yeah, it's it's a, I mean, since it's just explore. Yeah,

[00:21:16] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: so we have to make sure the space, the space, we have to make sure the space is there. And, um, I don't know if your mouse will show up, but, um, so if you look to, like, right, if you were going down the 1st baseline of your of the baseball diamond, there is an access road right there. Okay. We missed the driveway in our, so there will be an access point there. So that was one of the comments that we acknowledge that, yes, there needs to be an access there. So the comment was between the new midblock crossing that you see with the RRFB and that access road, explore that the bike lane can go both ways, both northbound. People don't have to, like, cross there.

[00:21:58] Member Alison Hicks: Correct. So we

[00:21:59] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: have to make sure that the space is there and that's why we said explore, you know, we'll look and see what's available. But I ask because I didn't

[00:22:05] Member Alison Hicks: get that at all.

[00:22:06] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: So that was that the idea is that how if you wanted to go north, yep, northbound, you would have to kind of go south to get around, whereas if we did a, a bidirectional there, they could use the crosswalk

[00:22:21] Member Alison Hicks: because people won't cross. Right. We want to do it by the same way. I think, because somebody didn't want it. So a large street 3 times. Yeah.

[00:22:31] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: So making sure that we have the space available in the right of way to do that, but that's what that's what that's enough sense to me that I endorse

[00:22:39] Member Alison Hicks: exploring it. Um, can you, I should know this by now, but when you do the traffic counts, you know, when I take this street, which I do a lot, um, it's very different depending on whether it's commute time or um, other times. So, do you, when do you do the traffic counts? We

[00:22:58] Transportation Planner Ahmed: did it a morning at evening peak. So that was from, to make

[00:23:02] Member Alison Hicks: sure... Yeah, it was 30 or

[00:23:04] Transportation Planner Ahmed: 7 in the morning till 9. Okay. So we captured the morning beats. Um,

[00:23:09] Member Alison Hicks: and then, uh, I noticed that, um, members of the public, not surprisingly, because this comes up, most of the time, when we, or maybe all the time, when we're doing street improvements like this. One of the things they, one of the comments that members of the public said was, could they have increased street trees and landscaping? Um, And then it was said that you would do that. If, in the future, if funding's available. Um, and so this is gonna be something I ask every time just to put it on, you know, not the back burner, but the front burner. Um, so, do you have plans to not just say, in the future, but make it more specific, and I'll name 2 things that are on my mind. One is that Google May, we've heard donate a substantial number of trees to us. There's one opportunity. We have an active transportation plan coming up, which may be an opportunity to, um, you know, fit in. Talk about funding for greening, and then the other one is, um, We have a tree inventory, but you could use to overlay, but, you know, since it's one street, you could probably just pick a street. to find tree deserts. Um, and there's also the California regional water quality control board, has some, uh, permitting that is, they're basically asking us to, I'm sure you know more about this than I do to, to increase impervious surfaces, possibly through this. Oh, and then the last thing is that this is something that the council sustainability committee is talking about increasingly, that we need, that if we want active transportation, it has to be shaded otherwise, our cars provide shade, but, um, you know, our our bikes and walking does not, we usually don't provide our own shape. So, do you have, um, something more specific than, uh, in the future,

[00:25:24] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: if we find funding. So what we've done for this one right now is we've made sure that we haven't precluded it for the future, right? So anywhere that there is a buffer, we can add greening in the future. Right now, because this project is so tightly tied to our pavement project that has already been budgeted and scoped and approved in the last cycle budget CIP cycle. The, it's not included in the bud scope for this project. So if this is something that council wanted us to pursue, there would be a cost implication to adding this to the project at this point in time. That being said, moving forward for any project that is a new project that comes out of maybe the ATP that's not necessarily tied to a planned cycle of a painting project, we would include, um, the, the greening or, um, landscaping as part of that planning and design process. So it's budgeted moving forward. So let me see that

[00:26:22] Member Alison Hicks: I understand because sometimes I have to hear things twice. So you're saying, it's in the projects we're seeing tonight, it says, in the future, if we find funding. But in the future, because community members and council members have brought it up multiple times, you can put it in a little more proactively. Is that what you're... for this specific

[00:26:46] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: project, council would like to direct staff to include greening, there would need to be a budget modification to the pavement rehabilitation project that this change is tied to. Right? This isn't, this project is basically a striping project tied to a paving project. Right? We're not changing curb to curb. We're not changing medians. There's no heavy curb construction, irrigation, utility work as part of this project. So to green it had a significant cost duplication. Doesn't mean we can't do it, but right now that is not part of the scope or budget that the CIP envisioned.

[00:27:34] Assistant City Manager Cameron: I think what I had envisioned is when we next go to council for the, what's it called, biennial, CIP, every 2 years, right? At that time, the biodiversity plan will be done. There will be an opportunity. Um, if council, you know, wants staff to explore, to put in essentially a, a greening project, but it would take away from the unrestricted funds, right? And so there are, um, trade-offs that would need to be evaluated. Right now, we have set out the 5 year CIP for sort of our plan, but if that plan, you know, where to deviate because we wanted to put in trees in instead of a different project, that's certainly something that can be evaluated. So

[00:28:21] Member Alison Hicks: it, so, you know, trees is a vague for an area like this, it's a vague concept, you know, is it one, is it, well, trees, plural. Is it 2 trees or is it 40 trees? You know, um, I, I'm imagining that just a few trees, would may not be more expensive than the, um, the, uh, bike lane, the, no, I can't even remember the bi-directional bike way we were talking about, 2 trees. I mean, I'm just wondering if some of the things we keep adding. I'll put it this way. To me, I walk a lot and people won't walk with me, like really a lot. They're like, well, take the car. because it's too hot. I mean just over the past several days. I've had many people refuse to walk with me. Tree, they will walk where there are trees. So, I find it as important as, as many of the things that I see added constantly, and I don't have a good idea of whether we're really talking about 2 trees, is that much, sometimes that's a good thing to close a gap. So is that really much more than a bidirectional? So bidirectional bike way would is paint. So

[00:29:40] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: the cost of paint is going to be relatively minor. If we were to add trees, you're talking new curb and gutter, new irrigation, the trees, the soil. If it changes our maintenance, I, you know, um, I, I, I couldn't tell you off the top of my head what something like that is going to cost, but it's more than just a paving project scope. Again, doesn't mean it can't be done. It's just there's, You go from pavement, which is asphalt, to concrete. So that's a difference. You're excavating, you're chain, um, So it, it, again, every, it can be done. I'm not, there's no, it's just where you want. To, If you're doing it as part of the paving, which is what this project is, it's just a different scope and it's a different budget. When, what, I... think you're getting at with the ATP is as we develop new projects, and we develop budgets and iterate the project from planning to design, that are project specific versus tagging along with a paving project, that would be the time to identify a scope and a budget for adding those greening. And as Jennifer mentioned, at that time, we would also have the biodiversity, having the shade canopy and maybe be able to target those areas specifically. Maybe

[00:31:05] Assistant City Manager Cameron: we can show or point out on the slides where we anticipate trees might go in the future. Would that be helpful? And the other thing to visualize?

[00:31:15] Member Alison Hicks: Yeah, I was actually going to make that as a comment that when you showed the, on some of the pictures you showed where trees are now, and that was super helpful to me to get a concept of, where it might be difficult to walk and where it's easy. And I'm going to say, you know, I may make a comment saying, explore putting in 2 trees because we may get a bunch from Google. But I'm gonna wait and say, I'm gonna, you know, This is not my neighborhood, or I'd be recused. Um, and, uh, so, I'm gonna wait and see what comments we get from the public. If the public, if nobody wants them, I'm probably not going to make that company.

[00:31:54] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: And again, we've done nothing to preclude it. So if at some point this is something that we have funding or there's a grant that we can chase for this type of work. That's something that we can do or if we see something that was very successful along the California project, whether it's even just the planter boxes or something that gives some greening there. We can explore that as well. And and the last thing, when you say you don't preclude,

[00:32:19] Member Alison Hicks: I did a member of the public emailed me and said, that the lanes could be a little narrower, that they were on, that they're 10.5 feet on El Camino, or 11 where there are buses, and here they're 11.5 . And she was saying, and for all I know, she'll say it again, because I noticed she's with us virtually, but, um, I'm wondering whether that would lead, would preclude greening even, or lead to even more greening, precluded glass. So

[00:32:52] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: we are planning for 11 foot lanes with this. We need to be able to get, you know, your trash truck through, your fire engine. Yes, you do have 11. So they're all correct. The planning includes an 11 foot lane. Yeah. That addresses that. Okay.

[00:33:07] Member Alison Hicks: Did you think of any additional questions?

[00:33:11] Member Ellen Kamei: I don't know if it's like a question or comment, but like, um, hopefully staff can bring back. I'd like to have it move forward. Um, and so perhaps staff can also, when this comes back to council, provide, um, you know, moving forward with a recommendation, but, um, potential, reading, as they were mentioning for for future. Um, I think, I think Miramake is like, what these improvements would be quite nice to walk on. Um, there's lots of trees there and some places. Yeah. You know, I think obviously other opportunities, but maybe that can be something we can put in the recommendation and stuff and come back with that. Um,

[00:33:52] Member Alison Hicks: okay. In that case, we now, um, would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person like to provide comments on this item, if you want to, uh, raise hand button and zoom, or if you're here, approach the lectern, and we will take in person speakers first. Any in-person speakers? No? Okay. In that case, we'll go to, um, virtual speakers, and let's say. Sean S. Hi, thank you. Uh,

[00:34:37] John Scarborough: I'm John Scarborough. I'm a fairly longtime mountain view resident now, and I'd like to thank you all for doing the work on this. I'd, Also like to say the work that y'all did on California Street is excellent. It's much more comfortable to ride on. And I think the items that our proposed here will make Miramonte even safer and better for the students and other folks who ride their bikes there. I noticed on California Street, there is, there are a lot of people who are parking on the street, and given that that's a relatively low income area for here, and perhaps there's a lot of people with jobs that require them to drive. I could see that as being kind of a growing pain we need to work out, possibly some on Miramonti as well. But, um, anyway, I like the uh, project and the options, and I'm really glad to see that we're moving forward with protected bike lanes, and maybe we'll get the, um, kind of network that we need so that there'll be more people who will be able to ride their bikes, and we'll have fewer car less car traffic, you know, maybe better community centers, so that we can reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. through transportation as, um, Council member McAllister mentioned in the last, um, Council meeting. So anyway, thank you very much for your work. Thank you. So,

[00:36:07] Member Alison Hicks: I don't see the name, so you can call them out. Oh, now I do. Next is, uh, Celia Paymer.

[00:36:26] Chair John McAlister: Celia painmer? Celia, do you hear us? Hmm Oh, you. Hi.

[00:36:55] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: Silly up here. Oh, you just muted me.

[00:36:57] Silja Paymer: There we go. I can hear you now. I was waiting for the unmute prompt. It wasn't showing up. Um, can you hear me? We can hear you, yes. Okay. Um, so just a couple comments. I'm very excited for this project. I'm similar to the last commenter. I'm really happy with the project on California. Um, I know it's not absolutely perfect, but it is a pilot project and it gives us lots of things that improve it. I know a lot of people are upset, but I think that's just because they hate driving and it makes them be in their cars 10 seconds longer, which they hate. Um, so for those of us not in our cars, it's much more pleasant. Um, which I think this project will do as well. Um, a couple comments. Um, I hope that the 25 mile per hour speed limit is expanded to the whole thing or have that prerogative. We don't have to do the traffic check 85% thing anymore. Um, and, um, I know it's most of the way 25, so let's make it all 25. And then the, um, this, there's still, I didn't walk that section, but I know on this section, there's still a lot of the signs that say no parking of cars wider than 7 feet and all that that are pinch points on the sidewalks. So I hoped those, I hope that those will be moved adjacent to the parking spaces so that the sidewalk is much more walkable and you get the whole space on the sidewalk to walk. Um, And, um, yeah, I'm just looking forward to being much more pleasant experience to bike down that way because right now it is terrifying to go around that corner to El Camino. Thank you.

[00:38:36] Member Alison Hicks: Thank you. So, Now we have Mary Dedio. Um,

[00:38:44] Mary Dateo: good evening. Um, I want to echo what's been said. I'm really excited about, um, these changes and making this, um, stretch of of Miramonti being safer and also just more comfortable for, um, cyclists. Um, more trees would be great. One place that comes to mind, um, is along the ballpark. Whenever we're in that segment, walking in that segment, it just feels like long stretches between the shady spots. Um, I like to echo what was just sad about changing this whole stretch to 25 miles an hour and to go along with that. Um, I, it would be great if the new crosswalks, um, could be raised all the way across to help with controlling the speed, um, similar to, you know, what, what's on the, uh, western port of Cuesta or we have raised crosswalks, um, in several places, I find that to be really helpful. One place that concerns me. Actually, um, I don't know if you can take a look at it, but the intersection with El Camino real. Um, North of El Camino real, as you're southbound, so as you're heading to this, all these new improvements, um, there is a separate bike lane, it's green painted, and then as soon as you get to the intersection, there's no, at least in the, in the, I realize this isn't designed yet, but, um, there's no real guidance for the cyclist. The green striping goes away and, uh, it looks kind of confusing around the pedestrian island. What's expected of the cyclist. So somehow, even at least just some green paint could be added there. Um, or, If the pedestrian island could change shape somehow, or I'm not sure how it would happen, um, but it, it, uh, it's really a scary intersection crossing in the southbound direction. Um, from, uh, a shoreline over to Miramonte, um, at this spot, and anything that could be done to help that would be greatly appreciated. Thank you so much. Thank you.

[00:40:57] Member Alison Hicks: So next we have April Webster. Hi,

[00:41:02] April Webster: thank you so much. Um, I also want to echo the plebius speakers said in terms of saying how much I appreciate um, the California Street project. It's more pleasant not just on a bike, but even in a car, people are racing far less down that street. I put on cruise control just to see what it's like and, um, it's about the, you know, prior to that, the road diet, people were racing past me. So it's it's really nice now. And it really shows what a complete treats design, how it can make a quarter feel safer and more comfortable for everyone. Um, I also want to say that I fully support the parking protected bike lanes in this project. They remove many of those really dangerous conflict points we see when parking is on the inside and the bike lane squeezed between. The park cars and moving track book. Um, I also think it's important to get the details right. And this came up on California around the driveways. I don't know if we could look at how parking is, uh, dressed to maybe cut back and get a clearer zone of visibility, um, to help with daylighting, et cetera, making sure those sight lines are open as a critical buffer. Um, I did want to say something about the proposed lane width. I saw in the cross section that it was 11.5 and that's, uh, it sounds like it was already resolved that it will be 11, but that's, uh, 11.5 is more, uh, more conservative even than what Caltrans has done and they're having their dip 94 guidelines, but also what they have on ECR. Um, they use 10.5 feet in the general traffic and then 11 feet for buses. on the outer, um, and it works. Um, I also want to say that safety isn't just avoiding people, people getting hit by cars. Um, but it's also dealing with, uh, extreme heat or, you know, just these heat waves we're having and, um, addressing shade deserts and EPA research shows that tree cover can lower surface temperatures by 20 to 45 degrees, um, Fahrenheit, and that kind of cooling can actually, like, can literally save lives. Um, it is one of the deadliest health hazards in the US, killing more people per year than flood, fires or hurricanes. So I think we really need to start thinking about that now. Trees don't grow overnight. It takes 15 to 20 years for the canopy to fully mature and get those cooling benefits. And we can't put this off. We need to really start thinking about it. Um, so I think it's great that we are carving out room for it, but I think we need to go a little bit farther. I think aligning the city's tree inventory with our complete streets projects to ensure that they're safe for people. When it's getting hot is important. Um, this is being done in Sacramento where it's much hotter. The Franklin Boulevard project. They actually, I think, pulled some funds to make sure that heat safety was addressed on their active transportation, and I think we need to be moving in that direction. Um, California law, SB 379 require cities to integrate climate adaptation and resilience into their planning. And um, I think we need to do that. I think at some point, um, cities will start to get um, face litigation for extreme heat. Thank you so much. Thank you.

[00:44:13] Member Alison Hicks: Are there any other speakers virtually? Uh, no more hands raised. Okay. So we'll close public speaking and bring this back to the committee for comments. Um, and then we'll need emotion. Um. Remember? Why aren't you at all comments?

[00:44:39] Member Ellen Kamei: No, I mean, I think, um, I, I'm open to staff recommendation with the, we Pat's comments that were included as well as looking at potential future, Breeding streaks, skating. Yeah, and I think, sorry, by the way, to say, biodiversity. Biodiversity. Future biodiversity. And I think that's where I'd like to leave it. Um, and then allow for, you know, great, a larger member of council and the public to be able to weigh in versus.

[00:45:15] Member Alison Hicks: So that's my motion. Explore it or what? I didn't get that.

[00:45:19] Member Ellen Kamei: Yeah, I think to include that the comments, right?

[00:45:24] Member Alison Hicks: as it's the... And so then I'll, I'll just ask additional things. Would you? I don't know whether it's worth, um, saying anything about exploring a raised crosswalk? Is that something we would ever do or is that too costly? So several. Uh, come address with that?

[00:45:51] Unknown Speaker: These cross walks are typically a um, traffic calming type of device. In this case, um, we haven't done that study. I certainly wouldn't want to put us behind schedule. This segment really does need to get paved in the upcoming year. Um, So I would, I would shelve the raised part for later. Um, as a potential if it does come up as a future community concern, um, it can go through the NTM key process. Okay, so you can raise crosswalks

[00:46:22] Member Alison Hicks: as a part of the, uh, neighborhood traffic calming. Okay, so people interested can hear that. Um, and then, Members of the public also talked about, uh, improving the crossing from, uh, shoreline across El Camino to Miramonte, is that a part of this project or is that, because that's on El Camino? That's outside of our situation. Um, and should have been handled when we did. El Camino is Caltrans right away. Right. But we just did that. So, they just, they just, they just did that. So, and when would the person who's concerned about that, where would they bring those concerns?

[00:47:09] Unknown Speaker: I think what we can do is look at the transition as we're looking at design, just to see how the flow across the intersection would work, if there's something that needs to be done on the north side, that's outside of this project scope, we can look at various avenues for how, depends on what the answer is, right? If it's if it's striping, we would, you know, we could see if it's something city crews could do or if we could tag it onto another project, um, but right now it is, um, it's something that can be looked at. I don't know that I can fully incorporate it as part of this project. I'd appreciate that because it is

[00:47:42] Member Alison Hicks: difficult. It is a difficult intersection. Um, and much use. Um, And what about the speed limit? Where would they take that request, the 25 mile per hour speed limit? That the neighborhood traffic coming or where would one take that request? Um,

[00:48:02] Unknown Speaker: I think that's something that we would look at as part of design, right? Especially as we're looking at, um, reducing the number of lanes from 2 in each direction down to one as part of that design and as we're doing the, um, legends on the street, the legends are anything that's like letters or numbers. Um, we would, you know, take a look at it at that time. Remember, we also are transitioning into segment B, which will be under construction very shortly. And so that will also inform the design for segment A to the North. So that's one that you could comment that you could easily incorporate. Is that what you're telling me? Changing speed limit is not an easy incorporation, but we would certainly take a look at all of the factors that go into that as well.

[00:48:55] Member Ellen Kamei: I think that I feel most comfortable moving forward with the staff representation, you know, a couple of suggestions. And then I don't feel like I have the information to, uh, provide feedback on what an appropriate speed limit is at this point. I feel that that requires traffic analysis, that I do not. I have not seen currently. Therefore, I feel that deciding on a certain speed limit doesn't. It doesn't feel appropriate to me at this time. We also are looking at removing a lane of traffic, which I think will affect, um, We're ruining a lane, which will have, I think, an implication on speed with which people go, which might address the speed issue, but I don't know that yet until we go forward with the project. Okay. So that's, Hopefully everyone understands that point of view. You know, I don't want that perfect to be the enemy of the good. I think we have something good in front of us, which we can further analyze and see if need to have, um, once we have more information, once we get, go from 4 lanes to two. I think there's going to be quite a bit of changes on Miramonte. Um, so, I think at that time. Okay. Well, I would say take a look now, but if I'm not going to get a 2nd then. I mean, I don't think it's like an easy thing to do. No, you know, so rather than have staff go down that path. I think there's a couple different steps we can we can take.

[00:50:25] Member Alison Hicks: So, and then I didn't quite understand the tree thing, how did that read? I just want to make sure that I'm, that I

[00:50:32] Member Ellen Kamei: understand most. So I think, and I'll look to staff, staff had suggested looking at future biodiversity opportunities.

[00:50:41] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: Yeah, we can pro- in the final report, we can recommend areas and we can also probably, I, we can include a cost for what I would really appreciate rough, a rough cost of what it would be to add that. So we can add that to the final report. Okay. And somebody recommend it, you know, the ballpark. which is kind of what I remember as the fairest part. Okay.

[00:51:03] Member Alison Hicks: Okay, so I would 2nd that motion. And all those in favor? Everyone raised their hands because you don't have a clear picture. Um, and now we can call Chair McAllister back to the comfort. It was not having it. Yes, my name.

[00:52:04] Chair John McAlister: Okay, we're going to take a 5 hour recess that should come. Oh, of course. Oh, that was my trip and fall. My retirement trip. Jesus. Try to get out of here.

[00:52:17] Member Alison Hicks: So, John, did you have, is this the water I can? The water open? It's a researcher, I got water. Amazing. You know, the only way. Yeah, yeah.

5.2 El Monte Corridor Improvements, Project 21-38

[00:52:40] Chair John McAlister: What if it was still on? And there was just a little one line, one of these things. Oh, that's nice. Okay, thank you, Allison, for doing this. Fantastic job under the last minute stress of moving this project forward. Oh, you know, watch this. I was going to raise my hand to say, hi, I'm inappropriate. You never know. You can come for the rest of this. You guys ready? Okay. More importantly, it's ours. Okay. Ah, we are now on to returns to the book. Well, you already knew I was leaving. Oh, no. Five go two. You want to keep me on track? Okay, 5.2. The Elmani Corridor Improvements, project 21.38. 5 points 2 is the Elmani Quarter Improvement Project 21 point. Dash 38 The staff presentation will be provided by Merry, Chris, and Young. Associate civil engineer and Joy, Joy Hotan. Please correct me or help me if I'm getting close to announcing those names. You're so much engineer. Okay, thank you.

[00:54:20] Chair John McAlister: I guess I was close. Thank you. Thank you for your present. Okay, let's begin.

[00:54:27] Associate Civil Engineer Hoang: Good evening, committee members. This is this item on the agenda tonight is a project update to the El Monte Corridor Improvement Project. I'm Mary Chris Wong with the Public Works Department, Associate Civil Engineer, and alongside me is Joy Houghton, Social Physical Engineer. So we get started the yellow highlighted area and this aerial illustrates the project limits, which includes 2 signalized intersections along El Camino Real at Esquila Avenue in El Monte Avenue, circled here in Black, and 7 non-signalized intersections along El Monte Avenue, circled here in blue. Um, these, these intersections are along Elmate from El Camino to the city limits at Springer Road and J Street. Elmonte Avenue is a 4 lane street with 2 travel lanes, a bicycle lane in each direction, a posted speed limit of 35 miles per hour and an average daily traffic volume of approximately 14,000 vehicles per day. So background on how we got here today. In 2019, the El Monte Corridor study was started to evaluate improvements for increased safety along the corridor. The study involved robust community engagement, including presentations to the bicycle, pedestrian advisory committee, and council transportation committee. In 2023, the project received federal funding for the one Bay Area grant program cycle 3 funds and the amount of $240000 for the scope of work along El Camino Real. That year, council also approved an alternative from the study, which included a road diet from 4 lanes to 3 lanes with buffered bike lanes on the Almonte board. corridor. In 2024, a professional service agreement with for design was executed, and preliminary design was kicked off. And that leads us to today, where staff has begun coordination efforts with Caltrans. And recently presented the 35% design to Peacock, which will be discussed later on the spot. As shown here, the project limits are again highlighted in yellow. El Camino Real, also called State Route 82. And highlighted here in Blue, is owned and maintained by Caltrans. This is of significance because it means the project requires cow chance design review and permitting to do any improvements within their right of way. The OBAG 3 funding is specifically for work within the Caltrans right of way. The city is fully funding the improvements on the El Monte corridor. Previously, it was 2 separate projects, but staff will deliver these projects together due to the overlapping project limits. And these next few slides, I'll be sharing the project scope in details. So starting with the El Camino Real and Escuela Avenue intersection. This will include high visibility crosswalks. Green bike lane, striping at conflict areas. And removal of the right turn only lane from Escuela onto El Camino Real with the installation of bulb outs with directional curb brands. Like, geez, the lines are not showing them soon.

[00:58:34] Assistant City Manager Cameron: That would be good to resume. I'm gonna check. Oh, our, our, um, our virtual component is not seeing the slideshow. Give us a couple seconds to see if we can push some more buttons. So,

[00:59:10] Associate Civil Engineer Hoang: which screen sharing now? Okay, okay. Thank

[00:59:14] Member Alison Hicks: you. Thank you. Oops. That's

[00:59:23] Chair John McAlister: Mountain View in 5 years. Oh. Do

[00:59:36] Member Alison Hicks: you want a movie? Yes, sometimes. Just pick up... Okay. Do you want to shut off the nobody? Oh, okay. Oh, okay. Okay, so you can just... Do

[00:59:52] Chair John McAlister: the best you can with what you have.

[00:59:54] Associate Civil Engineer Hoang: Okay, yeah, great. Thank you, everyone, for your patience. Right? So, um, So, I'll restart this slide, but, um, we are going through the project scope and detail again, starting with this El Camino reality and Escuela Avenue intersection. So this, at this intersection will, this project will install high visibility crosswalks. Green bike lane striking at conflict areas, and removal of the right turn only lane from Escola onto El Camino, but the installation of bullbouts and directional curb wraps. The intersection will also receive traffic signal upgrades, which includes conversion to an 8 phase traffic signal system, allowing protected left turns and eliminating pedestrian and vehicle complex. The design for the intersection at Alwante Avenue will implement the feasibility studies recommendations, and that includes high visibility crosswalks. Green bike lanes, striping at conflict areas. Maintaining 2 left turn lanes from westbound El Camino reality southbound Elvante Avenue. And removal of the right turn slip lane from El Camino onto El Monte Avenue. Yeah. Oh. The slipline? Yeah.

[01:01:22] Assistant City Manager Cameron: A free right turn. Oh.

[01:01:27] Associate Civil Engineer Hoang: Additionally, staff is coordinating with Caltrans to incorporate protected intersection elements at the southwestern corner of the intersection. This intersection will also receive traffic signal upgrades, allowing protected left turns and eliminating pedestrian and vehicle conflicts. Stuff is still evaluating the elements for the area created by the removal of the slip lane from Westbound El Camino to South Mount Almonte. Elements may include green storm water infrastructure as well as landscape improvements. Tree impacts will be determined at the next design milestone for the new bicycle and pedestrian pathways within the project scope limits. That will aim to avoid impacting the trees, but should heritage tree removals be required, that will recommended tree mitigation plan to the urban forestry board. This image shows a typical cross section that was included in the council approved concept for the road diet along El Monte Avenue from El Camino Real to the city limits at G Street. In this image, a vertical element, as shown. And the bicycle lane buffer will be um, is shown as a placeholder. The specific vertical elements that will be determined during the design process. Now, looking at the Almonte corridor between Edna Mary and Pilgrim, the design includes the following. The rogue diet beginning just south of marriage way. Bicycle buff buffered bicycle lanes on both sides. The high visibility crosswalks, and in this section, a pedestrian refuge island. Between Pilgrim Avenue and Hollingsworth. The road diet will continue and there'll be green bike lane striping in conflict areas. High visibility crosswalks. With pedestrian refuge islands at the intersection. The project introduces 2 new crosswalks at the Hollingsworth Almonte intersection. Rectangular rapid flashing beacons or other known as the RRFBs, crossing El Monte at this location will be added to the scope and staff will be seeking additional funding. And here between Sparker. And Springer Road, the road diet continues to the city limits, along with the green bike lanes and high visibility crosswalks. The project was presented to be packed this past June, and the committee provided the following motion for consideration. The PAC approved the preliminary design with recommendations for staff to look into the following. At the signalized intersections along El Camino Real. A protected left turn coming out of the commercial parking lot south of Escuela Avenue onto El Camino rail. Reducing the southbound lane on Escola to give more space to the bicycle lane with. And to evaluate the cost for adding protected treatments on the northeast corner of Escuela Avenue. As well as the southeast corner of Almonte Avenue and El Camino Real. On the Almonte Border portion, BPACs feedback included to have staff evaluate the approach at J Street, to reduce conflicts between vehicles and bicyclists. And BPAC also recommended a speed study be performed after construction to identify any opportunities to reduce the post-it speed lines. Based on staff's initial assessment, staff will work on incorporating the elements highlighted here in Green. Particularly the westbound, left turn on Escuela Avenue in El Camino Real, the conflict zone on El Monte towards J Street, and the speed survey after the improvements are constructed. For items in gray, staff is still evaluating additional protective elements at the intersection. It will need to coordinate with Caltrans for those improvements within Caltrans, rightively, including the need to comply with Caltrans design guidelines. So following this meeting, staff will evaluate the feedback obtained in both BPAC and CTC meetings and update the design accordingly. Staff will continue coordination with Caltrans as design further develops. Vital design of the project is anticipated to be completed in summer 2026 and staff will bring the project to council for approval in authorization upbidding. Construction is anticipated to start in spring 2027 following Caltrans approval. So tonight, staff is has this recommendation for the commission's consideration, and that concludes the presentation. Thank you. So,

[01:07:02] Chair John McAlister: do we have any questions from our mid December?

[01:07:10] Member Alison Hicks: Okay, I'm going first. Um, okay, 1st what is, I, just like before on the, the, um, bi-directional bike lane, what's protected left turn for a bike? 2 for bikes? Oh, it wasn't for

[01:07:28] Associate Civil Engineer Hoang: a bike? Oh, it was a protected left turn. Protected left burns is it'll have a designated lane for the vehicle. So it will be painted so that

[01:07:38] Member Alison Hicks: it's visible. A left turn. It'll have like a left turn only, error

[01:07:43] Chair John McAlister: signal? I

[01:07:44] Member Alison Hicks: mean, sorry, not signal marking. Okay, and protected just means that it's solely for that and any visible.

[01:07:53] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: If I can add, um, protected left turn for vehicle means that the left turning movement will get its own face, so it gets a left green arrow rather than just a green ball that allows left turn movements, um, and must yield to pedestrian, but with the protected left movement, it eliminates that conflict when pedestrians are in the cross. Only familiar

[01:08:18] Member Alison Hicks: with the term protected, I think, bike lane. Actual protection. Thank you. Um, and then, um, What their lighting improvements named, but, um, do you have further detail on what lighting improvements would be considered? I, this day, or what's typical in a project like this. Yes,

[01:08:43] Associate Civil Engineer Hoang: they will do, um, an elation test along the corridor and wherever there might need some, upgrades to the, Amount of areas

[01:08:57] Member Alison Hicks: that are lit. So it's typically evaluation and then street lights. Okay. Okay, good to know. Never asked that one before. Um, and, uh, I think most of the rest of mine are, Um, oh, the motion here, the previous motion said to incorporate VPX comments, is that implied with this motion as well? Let's suggested motion that you'll incorporate the effects. Or should we add that if we're making that? Yes,

[01:09:35] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: um, staff already, um, completed initial um, assessment of things that we can include in the project. And then, as Mary Chris mentioned, the items in grade, we're still continuing to. Okay, so we're assuming that those are a part of the motion. Correct. Um, and

[01:09:52] Member Alison Hicks: then, uh, and then my, last question is, um, the study says there will be green street improvements where feasible. Um, so what, do you know, uh, do you have any more detail on that and or should we, um, say what we said for the last item on the agenda?

[01:10:21] Associate Civil Engineer Hoang: Yes, so we are evaluating just the budget, um, also because in the areas along El Camino that is Caltrans right of way, we want to evaluate what we came due to comply with their design guidelines. And of course, what we, um, the funding can stretch out to be, but we are looking at those particular corners, if I may scroll over. Example, the area highlighted here in red. And I think, um, at least for BPAC, they, their input was also potentially at, either of the...

[01:11:06] Member Alison Hicks: Yeah. Oh, so they made particular comments. Yeah, there are some areas that are kind of bare. In this in this area. Okay. Thank you. Those were my questions. So

[01:11:21] Member Ellen Kamei: I have, um, thank you. Oh, thank you to staff. Um, I know that I was just trying to like look back. I know that this is a very high conflict area, if not one of the, the most, right? The, yes, El Camino that I remember correctly. I was just trying to go back and realize, because I remember when we were doing like the vision zero. There was this like rain storm. I thought this, it was like a school album, you know, and then, Am I remembering correctly? because that helped me remember the different spots that we were trying to address. Yeah. And this is one of the, it wasn't in the set. It

[01:11:59] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: may be just because it's one of the 1st protected intersections that we're working on along El Camino. We do have a lot more. Um, to follow this project and included in our 5 years, yeah, plan. Yeah,

[01:12:12] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: Robert Gonzalez, the, um, principal civil engineer. So you may be remembering back to the streetscape plan. Okay, is that? Um, the straight escape plan identified 5 primary corridors that were crossing El Camino. So they saw that it's high conflict areas, and that's why this project was identified for the OBAG funding and received the group. Okay. So it was identified. So that was... So I don't remember it.

[01:12:37] Member Ellen Kamei: Okay. Oh, okay, wow. 2019. Okay, so my memory goes, see, this is good then. Okay. So does Escuela El Camino and El Camino El Monti count as 2 of the 5 on ECR? Yeah, that's a double check, but I think I believe it's one. Okay, great. Okay. So then we have 4 more. Okay. Yes, all right. Okay. Um, and then had a question about the slip lane. Um, So, I saw too that it's the Caltrans right away. So, um, And it looks like we're looking at those landscaping and green infrastructure area. So to kind of, um, council member Hicks's comments about biodiversity and things. We could look at that as something, right? And it could be more than just a passive area because I think it'd be, it'd be pretty substantial once it's, so is staff looking at that as like, I don't know if that's the right word, but like some of a place making opportunity or something or that's, yes, yes, definitely. Okay.

[01:13:47] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: More green, more green, storm watering infrastructure. um, and anything that creates some sort of, um, sense of place for this location. Just that. It's large area. So there's different

[01:14:04] Member Ellen Kamei: opportunities. Right. And I think that kind of dovetails it to my next question, which is, um, and I don't know if I want to say this kind of uh, customer McAllister, but is this like a public art

[01:14:15] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: opportunity, perhaps, or are you thinking just green? Just asking.

[01:14:21] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: I don't want to give you ideas. It is time just greeny. Just greeny. Okay. All right. It looks like, I'm just gonna... Hi,

[01:14:31] Assistant Public Works Director Arango: Edorango, this is a flip works record. Thank you for the question. As far as the public art, the public art policy is specific on the types of projects, the qualified performance art, and it gives us some consistencies for staff to know how to budget and plan for a project. So a roadway project like this isn't, doesn't fall within those categories. Okay. Thank

[01:14:51] Member Alison Hicks: you. Thank you. Those were my questions. Okay. So

[01:14:55] Chair John McAlister: I don't have the background at all that you have. But, um, I'm gonna dig in. So the slip lane. Uh, Why was it determined to eliminate it? I

[01:15:15] Associate Civil Engineer Hoang: think the, um, the safety along that, with it having its kind of designated right turn movement, it would know that vehicles could potentially speed through that, and there are, there is crossings for pedestrians along there, um, heading towards south of this photo, towards, along the Almonte Apne Corridor. Were

[01:15:41] Chair John McAlister: there any accidents, car accidents, destiny accidents that says, this slip lane is not safe, has there been any data behind it to say, this wasn't been a connect? This has been here for 50 years, so I'm just wondering, what decided that? It's just that you're taking it out. Is it just assumptions or is there data behind it? I'll

[01:16:07] Assistant City Manager Cameron: let the staff talk to data, but also in general throughout this whole area, slip lanes are, um, considered an old design feature. Um, they do encourage high rates of speed for vehicles making that right turn lane. It does introduce significant conflict points between vehicles and pedestrians and bicyclists. I can let you know that in the last agency I was with, I was with them for a very long time and there's a concentrated effort to reduce the planes off route that agency. So it is, it is a, um, regionwide emphasis, um, an acknowledgement on the, uh, growing importance of alternative, um, ways of getting around besides just vehicles. Uh,

[01:16:54] Chair John McAlister: isn't there not a stoplight stop sign on that uh, slip link?

[01:16:58] Associate Civil Engineer Hoang: There is not. Oh, I'm sorry. Um, going...

[01:17:07] Chair John McAlister: Going from El Camino to El Monte, they're not signals, or stop sign, that control the slip line.

[01:17:14] Associate Civil Engineer Hoang: So there would be a stop sign from, um, right when the vehicle goes discipline to El Montana. There is a signal there. It

[01:17:24] Chair John McAlister: does control slip lane traffic. Are you aware of that? Well,

[01:17:31] Associate Civil Engineer Hoang: I said those stocks. Then you're saying signal. So thank you for crying.

[01:17:39] Chair John McAlister: So by doing that. Now, you have to, without it, does that own my Caltrains, that whole section? Got it. We got trams. Caltran. That would fall in their right place. And Do you, has there been any traffic count on how many people use the slip lane and how that will affect the traffic going around the corner? I

[01:18:02] Associate Civil Engineer Hoang: don't have that data. Um, but we can go back to either traffic or even from Caltrans if they have that data. I think we would have to go back to 2019.

[01:18:14] Transportation Planner Ahmed: Yes, if, if I could add, um, the concepts shown for the intersection of El Camino and El Monte and also the El Monte corridor, came out of the feasibility study that started, I believe, in 2010, 2 or, um, and it's, it went through a robust community engagement. So, The removal of the slip lane may have come from the community as a mask to be included in the project. Okay,

[01:18:43] Chair John McAlister: and I wasn't here, so. My approach to traffic is, I would say, a little different than others. Um, The project scope again you mentioned. So how many times has there been a, is there another scope? This is this evolving project scope on this project? Because at the initially, when you did your comment, you said this project, we're going to do the project scope again. So is there gonna revise this or revisit or is this the preliminaries project scope and so you're still finalizing it? We

[01:19:22] Associate Civil Engineer Hoang: are in the early stages of design. Yeah, in Robin. Yeah,

[01:19:28] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: thank you for the question, Robert Gonzalez, principal, civil engineer. So looking at the the CTC memo on page three. Um, it lays out a June 23rd, um, where we went to council and the alternative 3 was approved. So those, those scope items, including the slip plane, were approved by council, and that's how we move forward to the design stage. The only elements that are changing at this point are the size of the buffer, size of the bike lane, specific elements on corner treatments, items that were brought up by BPAC. So those elements that are, um, designed details or, or adjustments are what we're looking at now. These primary design elements are, are the ones that council move forward with, and that's how we started our RFP, our consultant contract. So

[01:20:18] Chair John McAlister: when we talk about scope, um, Is this fully funded, are you still looking for funds? At

[01:20:25] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: this moment? Um, well, I mentioned in the Hollingsworth Almonte Avenue intersection. Uh, we would, The staff is looking into the RFB at that intersection. So I, I think we will be looking for additional funding so that we can add that to the project scope. Okay. Um. And

[01:20:49] Chair John McAlister: you also mentioned on the traffic signals, they're going to be signalized or they're going to be upgraded. Will those signals, uh, Is the city of Mountain View? Um, are those going to be signals that city of Mount View will be potentially using on some of its streets? Will it be compatible with what we're doing? Are we, are they more advanced than what we have in the past? And I know Cal Channel will control those signals, but. Well, we have any, just give me some insight about these traffic sting noodles who are going to be computerized AI, what so forth. Upgrade.

[01:21:25] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: The upgrades that we are mentioning are for the protected signal, phasing that, um, senior engineer, how was explaining, um, so the upgrades are to, At the protected left turns, particularly at the Escuela Avenue in Elmonte, El Camino intersection, but, And then for, this intersection, El Camino Rail and Elmonte, we are adding that crosswalk, um, on the west on this image. So we will need to upgrade that signal to have it so that it's, there's no conflict with the left turn. And then because we are touching the signals, we will have to, uh, look into signal infrastructure, signal cabinets. And those are the type of upgrader preference. So, even

[01:22:20] Chair John McAlister: though it's, it's on Caltran line. We're paying for the signals. It

[01:22:26] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: will be funded by this project, but they will maintain it. Okay. And oh, no. And is that cost

[01:22:32] Chair John McAlister: and determinative?

[01:22:34] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: We have estimates, and we do have that 2.400000 0 back grant for this, for those areas, the

[01:22:42] Chair John McAlister: intersections. Has there been any studies to say how many people are on bikes going along Elmo?

[01:22:54] Transportation Planner Ahmed: I believe we have counts from the study, but don't know off the top of my head.

[01:22:59] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: Yeah, staff would have to come back and answer that question with some details. Those may have been done as part of the study but we don't have this in front of us. Was there,

[01:23:08] Chair John McAlister: I mean, this sounds like a very... So, I'm trying to, as you, if you just, uh, do your studying. trying to figure out the cost analysis of how many people really use the bike lanes versus, I, well, that's comments, but, yeah, I'd like to see how if there was an analysis on that one. Um. The, I noticed that on the turning into the, the diet lane, did you show the scene where you go into the parking lot? No, the shopping center. You had a clip in there. It was when you were showing a road diet. No, I agree that, okay. Well, while you're on that slide. Why? Again, Escuela is sort of an interesting interesting section. So why taking out the right turn league? What was the thought behind that? From a squealer, going, uh, north or west. The mobile? The bulb out.

[01:24:12] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: Yes, yes, we are adding that bulb out. And I think the intent is, again, to slow the speed of the right turns, um, so that they are in that kind of into that right and through lane to help. Yeah, kind of.

[01:24:33] Chair John McAlister: Has there been any accidents, any incidents that would indicate that the right turn lane was an issue? Now,

[01:24:40] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: I am where there was a accident not too long ago, I think, in April of this year. Um, but I, is, was it at that particular location? I'm not too old. It was at the...

[01:24:55] Chair John McAlister: I do know that coming out of the Walgreens. It was crazy because The signal is nuts. Yeah, that's one of those intersections. If you're going off of squaling, making a left turn. People are, they have the opportunity to walk. So are you saying the signals are going to say, people will be able to walk, no cars will be moving, or are you still going to have compatible, uh, a square leg turning left going eastbound and people crossing across the street? Because there's constant conflict from what I see there. It's

[01:25:28] Public Works Director Ng: typically with the vehicular movement. I'll say, but the 2 bulb belts on the corners do a couple of things. One, it shortens a pedestrian crossing distance, right? So a pedestrian is not as exposed, if you will, as long in the street as they're making that particular movement crossing the street. Um, Secondly, is that elimination of a free right turn, um, makes a pedestrian or bicyclist, whoever's crossing the street more visible to the driver, right? They're coming to like a point in the corner, rather than a vehicle cutting the corner, and having 2 potential locations where there could be, could be conflict. So, again, this is, um, we think a good thing. that we are doing at this intersection.

[01:26:12] Chair John McAlister: Okay, so could we find that one slide where you're doing, showing the road that proposed road diet, going into the parking lot? Okay, right there. So, you see right where the red ends, that's a right turn into the parking lot of the shopping center. So there's gonna be, um, congestion there. So were you aware of that? and why are you doing the road diet there and not maybe down a little bit further or past it so that there won't be that conflict of people coming out or going in? Right there. If we, that's

[01:26:55] Transportation Planner Ahmed: something we can take a look at, uh, my understanding is this is the earliest point that we could do this that allows, um, the cars to then decelerate and merge into one lane front tune. But

[01:27:08] Chair John McAlister: the cars will be, okay, it's, I'm asking it because there, I see a potential conflict or people slowing down to make the right turn. People not paying attention, the bikes going through. Um, so I, That's a concern, Mike. Um, Okay? Has your, um, now, uh, that's a context. Is the, uh, crosswalk at, uh, March way being affected at all? Um,

[01:27:39] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: it turns in just the high visibility crossfunk. So

[01:27:45] Public Works Director Ng: it's across, it's a crosswalk right now is my understanding. but it's just a regular crosswalk way. And so we're going to be upgrading it with the ladder style, which is not how you're going to be, uh, reference that we've been sweetened out. Will

[01:27:57] Chair John McAlister: there be like that? I thought it would normal lifestyle.

[01:27:59] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: There are lights. Uh, yeah, I think there are, um, a RFB. In that intersection, or, or closer to Edna Mary, but there is one already RFB along, El Monte Avenue.

[01:28:15] Chair John McAlister: Has there been any consideration or study, considering that Elmani is a major thoroughfare coming from all the way from Foothill Expressway through Los Altos coming into this area? That how traffic's gonna be affected? I'll

[01:28:31] Public Works Director Ng: say that this study was done in 2019, 2020 era. That's also around the time that council approved the study, so all of that analysis was done way back then. Yeah, things. Five

[01:28:45] Chair John McAlister: years, so, does that information change will modify over time? Um,

[01:28:51] Public Works Director Ng: not significantly, I would say, if anything, the city's grown over time. Um, even despite, you know, the COVID years, we're starting to see rebound with respect to traffic. So I would say not significantly enough to change the results of that study. Well,

[01:29:06] Chair John McAlister: you just said things were growing. So, potentially, the traffic could be greater now than it was before. Not significantly.

[01:29:14] Public Works Director Ng: We've rebounded, and as a city, we're growing, but it's, I wouldn't, I wouldn't undo something that councils already approved from 2019 when there was very robust study done at that time. Hi.

[01:29:26] Assistant Public Works Director Arango: Um, get a Rango again. Um, to add on to director meetings comments. Um, El Monte from El Camino Real to J Street, because that's the city limits. Siulan's in each direction, and the Provo's road diet provides it, one leg instruction. Once you get to J Street. It forks off. We have J Street that goes to the right, and then we have Springer that continues. Both are one lane in each direction. So, and that's pretty consistent through 2 foothill. Um, so again, one lane in each direction. So this is effectively matching that configuration. And again, what the other comments that you've heard before about the community looking for, um, traffic calming measures along this section. And um, Let's

[01:30:14] Chair John McAlister: see what else I have from there. Okay, I think that asks my questions. So then we will bring it out to the, any other questions before anybody came up with the 2nd thought or anything? Would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person like to admit prize, like comments on this item? If so, please click the raised hand button on Zoom or approach the left. Uh, no one from the uh, in persons coming for it? Is there anybody virtually? Yes. Um, So

[01:30:54] Transportation Planner Ahmed: we have paymer? Who? Celia Paymer? Oh, Sylvia, thank you. Hi,

[01:31:02] Silja Paymer: um, thank you. Um, I have a lot of comments, so I'll try and be quick. Um, 1st off, um, the right turn on Escuela, I like the idea of the bulb out, but if you have it, please have a slip lane for the bikes. Otherwise the bikes are forced into the car traffic. Um, right at a point when everyone's like looking around. So, let's keep that conflict to a minimum and make sure there's still a lane there. Um, and then I do have to say, I'm not loving the options for the bikes turning left onto or off of Escuela. Um, even when we hopefully add the no right turn on red. Um, there's always conflicts for pedestrians and bikes with cars, even if they're going straight, there's cars turning right into them, um, on a green light. So I wonder if it is possible to look into a bike or pedestrian bike and pedestrian scramble cycle. Right now with the head start cycles already. We're adding, you know, 15 seconds now that we're having that protected left. So why not go to 30 and actually make it safe for bikes and pedestrians? We have 4 to 5 protected cycles for cars. Let's have one for bikes and pedestrians. Um, Then also, um, I do really like the Hollingsworth crosswalks. Thank you for putting one on both sides. I love that. Um, I do want to clarify the slip lane from El Monte, or from El Camino onto El Monte, does have a light, but it's after the pedestrian crossing. It makes the cars stop for the oncoming cross traffic, not for pedestrians or bikes. Um, so that does not increase safety. Um, in terms of the bike count, uh, the bike users tend not to show up when they feel like they're going to die. So, sort of like saying, hey, there's a river between us and the town, no one ever goes to town. We don't need to build a bridge. We do need to build a bridge if we want people to actually go from our side of the river to the other, right? They need to not die on the way. Um, I agree that the J Street intersection needs fixing. I bike through that every day and it's it's a mess. Um, so I don't know what the fix is. I liked the idea of the roundabout, but I guess that got thrown out at some point, but, um, it is kind of a scramble there. Um, and then also remembering, um, for the El Monte, Road diet, that the lights are the choke point for traffic, not the number of lanes. So unless we're doing something about that light cycle to get more cars through, which we're not because we prioritize El Camino traffic. The number of lanes isn't what's gonna make a difference. So, um, let's reduce the number of lanes, make it so bike users don't feel like they're going to die, so they actually use the road and that'll reduce cars, which will reduce traffic for everyone. No one likes to be in their car behind another car. So let's get the other cars off the road by putting them on bikes, right? All right, thank you so much.

[01:33:53] Mary Dateo: Mary Dadio? Uh,

[01:34:01] Mary Dateo: I didn't see the unmute button is. can you hear me Yes, we can hear you. Thank you. Okay. Oh, I'm sorry. Um, uh, I just want to say I'm super excited to see the improvement with the, the, uh, having a dedicated left turn lane coming out of the, uh, next to the Walgreens and having separate, uh, light cycles because I, the few times I've been at that intersection, I've always wanted to, um, coming out of Escuela. I've always been trying to make a left hand turn and it is on a bike and it is, I can't imagine how scary it is for the pedestrians because it's, it's, it's awful for a bike. You just have no idea what all of a sudden there's somebody coming at you from the, the Walgreens, because people come around the corner all of a sudden really fast and you have no idea what they're going to do because nobody uses their turn signal. So, thank you, thank you, I'm super excited to see that. Um, I do want to say El, he's El Camino, Real, and El Monte. On that southwest corner, so in the diagrams, it's been sort of like a purple blob or a pink magenta colored blob. Um, a previous iteration did keep a slip lane for uh, pedestrians and cyclists in that purple blob area, so the slip lane for cars one way, but it was still there for cyclists and pedestrians, and that would be such a treat to just get away from traffic even for the 30 seconds or whatever it takes you to bike through that space, um, assuming especially there are going to be some trees and stuff added. It would be such a pleasure to just, just have a few minutes away from traffic. So I'd really love to see that. And I agree, uh, as you approach the J Street area, that, uh, is pretty scary, but I think some of that belongs to Los Altos. And so, um, in general, thank you so much for this whole project. I know you guys have been working on it for a long time and it's really shaping upgrade. Thank you.

[01:35:57] Unknown Speaker: Thank you Sean S. Um,

[01:36:02] John Scarborough: hi, thanks. Yeah, this is John Scarborough, and I am also, like the other speakers, really excited about this project. It's good to see this coming and improving over the years. Um, and I'd like to. Take a moment to thank Chair McAllister for reminding me in an earlier, me and probably some other folks who were focused on that time on building greenhouse gas improvements, the transportation also is an important factor to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. And, you know, these kind of projects, like in California Street, along El Camino, getting the protective bike lanes in there, getting more street trees where we can. You know, that'll help reduce our greenhouse gas emissions, reduce the heat island, get more people walking and biking. So thank you for the reminder on that. Um, so I like the plans, uh, much like California Street and ACR. You know, the protected bike lanes are good. I've been seeing people riding in the bike lanes on ECR. Even families. It's just amazing, you know, big change since, you know, the time before they protected by planes. And then on California Street, that is so much more comfortable to ride on. I see we still have some problems with the, well, a lot of people parking. So if we can work that out there, we should be able to work it out everywhere else in the city. So I'm really excited to get that done. Um, I'd be in favor of more space for trees on this project. So if we could have more of a park space if the slip lane goes, have more of a park-ish type space rather than a grassy, um, storm water attention pond. I'd be in favor of that. I think that would make it a nice gateway into, you know, the El Camino real part of mountain view from the south. Uh Yeah, if we have, if we can have some green, like just planter boxes. If we're not going to have trees, those would be nice. You know, kind of like they have the planter boxes on California Street. Hopefully it'll be filled soon. Um, but trees are even better, so we can have that. I'd be in favor of that. So thank you all for your work on this. I really appreciate it. You're making our city much better to get around by bike and walk and don't have to take our cars. Thanks. Thanks. April. Hi,

[01:38:30] April Webster: thank you. Um, I just want to echo what the other speakers have said in terms of being really happy to see this project taking shape. Um, and, you know, protected infrastructure going in there for people moving on bike um, and walking. Um, basically gonna plus one a bunch of things that other folks have said. I want to say that I strongly support Celia's comment about including a protected scramble cycle for both cyclists and pedestrians. This is a really dangerous intersection. And, um, it can be one of the, like a really effective tool to avoid, reduce those conflicts at intersections. They just get people. You'll see another communities or whatnot. They'll sometimes have lights, but giving them a head start. You have better visibility as a driver in terms of seeing them. So I've absolutely +one that. Um, and, you know, if we can have a long, a little bit of an extra crossing interval to get them, um, out there, that would be wonderful. Um, a huge +one for the elimination, elimination of free rate turns, you know, that sort of old school practice. I am thrilled to see the city starting to, you know, implement that and, you know, it's one of the best practices and complete streets design. So, kudos. Um, yeah, they just, you know, make it, they slow down the car and and make it easier for them to see, um, instead of, you know, speeding right through that and maintaining speed as they go around the turn. Um, Also, um, Awesome to see the road diet. Um, this further, I think, strengthens the safety of this, um, the stretch, this project, and we've seen how, you know, John mentioned this, how impactful it's been on California Street, how, you know, on um, El Camino Real, in terms of calming traffic, um, and just creating more comfortable space for people, biking and walking, and it's, you know, pretty much state of the art. Um, so, oh, and I also wanted to, really glad John mentioned, you know, if you're anywhere that there's space that we're removing some of the space, um, it's a great opportunity, like the slip lane. It's a great opportunity to add in greening. Um, and so some sort of, you know, GSI, green storm water infrastructure or trees or anything like that. Um, You know, I think that should definitely be considered. You know, just giving heat, um, is a safety issue. It's not just people getting hit. And we have to start thinking in that, I think that frame of mind that the more we could add ingraining and more canopy, um, and thinking long term. We need to get this stuff in place so that we're not going to have, um, people suffering, you know, on the streets, they won't be able to walk or bike around if it's too hot. And there's, you've seen this already in other communities. Sacramento has started tackling this already. So I think we should always think about this when we have an opportunity. Thank you so much. So

[01:41:39] Chair John McAlister: that was the last of our virtual speakers, or do you see some more? Mm, that is all. Okay, thank you, people, for staying on and give us your comments. We appreciate them. I will now bring this back to the committee for comments and action. Would anybody have comments or further questions?

[01:41:59] Member Alison Hicks: So, um, are any of the things that members of the public brought up, um, possible to consider, uh, the 2 that I, the one, the big one that I saw was, um, something additional for people, uh, particularly for bikers and pedestrians at El Camino and Escuela, where there was a fatality in. last April. Um, So that is a, as, come under set, and in practice. It's a, um, dangerous intersection for pedestrians and bikers. They mentioned a scramble. Is that something that's easy to consider? Hard to consider? It would be on El Camino? So, It seems like pretty prohibitive.

[01:42:48] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: It would be certainly something that Caltrans would need to uproot it as it is within their right. Right. So

[01:42:56] Member Alison Hicks: are there any kinds of improvements at this point or do you feel it's improved enough since April? We

[01:43:05] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: are still evaluating additional protected intersection elements, I believe, on the south, this corner of the intersection, um. Off the top of our head right now. We don't know, but that's something we would be evaluating with our design.

[01:43:25] Member Alison Hicks: I just pay special attention to that intersection because it has a big problem. Um, and then the other one they talked about was the slip lane area that could be greened, should be greened. Could there be a biker pedestrian path winding through, whatever is there that's green? Is that a possibility or not? It is a possibility and will evaluate that, definitely, as it's designed for the development. Okay. So those are the 2 things that I heard from the public that I wanted to add. Otherwise, I would be willing to make a motion, but okay, so I make a motion to accept the proposal, the staff proposal, uh, include...

[01:44:06] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: No, no, I didn't want to interrupt you while you did your motion. Okay. I

[01:44:10] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: was just going to confirm the staff. So, the slip lane that you mentioned for, um, for pedestrians and bikes. We're not removing the sidewalk that's there now. So pedestrians will still have access there. and we can still look for this element that includes this plane for bikes as well. So we're not we're not eliminating that. And then in terms of looking for conversation. You can integrate

[01:44:33] Member Alison Hicks: it beautifully, which, with whatever greening you do, that. Right, right.

[01:44:36] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: Thanks to the herd parking lot. Yes. Um, the graining elements. I agree with the with the public comments, that the Slow Lane area seems like it's large enough to accommodate additional trees as well as storm water. We're sizing the storm water now. So as a senior engineer, I mentioned, once we get that size, we'll understand better how many trees we could actually plant in that area. Okay. Continue. Thank you.

[01:45:03] Member Alison Hicks: So I'm making a motion to accept the recommend- staff recommendation, uh, with particular attention on the El Camino, Escuela, um, intersection. And, um, yeah, how to incorporate bikes and pedestrians through the area that was a cycling and will now be a greener space. Do

[01:45:31] Chair John McAlister: you have any comments? Well, that's a discussion. So your comments, please?

[01:45:36] Member Ellen Kamei: Wow. I'm actually quite excited. We're moving forward with this project because I'm happy that staff was able to remind me that this was one of the 5 priority areas and that we're making progress. I also strongly feel that sliplings are dangerous and have had experiences as a cyclist and runner, um, getting almost hit multiple times because of the high speeds that people go through the split planes, at least the one near me because people are coming off of central into the wisdom area. They just come at like 50 miles an hour. Um, so I'm actually quite excited and I think anything to help get us more connected and made people saver is the rap I want. Okay. And it's gonna green a corner. So I think that's going to be great. Well, you know, probably also support the motion too.

[01:46:31] Chair John McAlister: There is a there's a business there on El Camino that's a rental place. What would happen to the driveway that's at the slip lane? Yes,

[01:46:43] Associate Civil Engineer Hoang: we do acknowledge that I believe you're referring to the Hertz one. Yes, uh, that driveway, what we are looking right now is we would want to configure to come off of El Camino into it, but we do need to, or our design consultant is looking into that. Yeah, access

[01:47:04] Public Works Director Ng: will still be provided. We haven't worked through all the details. of the design in terms of how exactly that will occur, but it's absolutely the intent to maintain access. So

[01:47:14] Chair John McAlister: are you saying? Yeah, they have two. You're taking out one. Yeah. Um, No, well, that's the thing is the, the, you would reduce their parking where they keep their cars that are for rent. So, be

[01:47:33] Member Alison Hicks: more parking, less parking for it. That's where I rent my car. It's a cute little, but super cute little strong.

[01:47:40] Chair John McAlister: How are you going to address that issue? Well,

[01:47:43] Associate Civil Engineer Hoang: the design consultant is looking into that and we will coordinate with that. You

[01:47:49] Chair John McAlister: have a preliminary idea? Just

[01:47:52] Associate Civil Engineer Hoang: the access point coming from outcoming now.

[01:47:55] Chair John McAlister: So, where there's a right turn arrow now on that intersection, you would be putting a driveway in there. Just right before, right

[01:48:08] Public Works Director Ng: before the right turn. Oh, yes.

[01:48:12] Chair John McAlister: I have an arrow there. So you're saying right in that area? Can

[01:48:15] Associate Civil Engineer Hoang: we flash up? to slide. to the salt. So, yeah, right below that right turn arrow marking, there's a symbol for the driveway, right here. Yeah,

[01:48:29] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: so... So there's no plans to remove a driveway. So, how

[01:48:34] Chair John McAlister: are they gonna get turned? Is that green? There's nowhere to turn. So are you going to keep that so that they can turn into that parking driveway? Yes, we will. There will be a break in the buffer. in the buffer there.

[01:48:45] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: There's there's no there's no curb at that point. So we would have a breaking curb and we would have a break in the buffer there. So that doesn't that doesn't show proposed conflict striping, but we could have proposed conflict striping there. So it would be a right turnoff. And almost a, almost like a 160 degree turn into the, into the lot, but it would, we would keep both of their driveways.

[01:49:08] Member Ellen Kamei: Man, make a suggestion. Well, you still. Well, my my suggestions are suffocating, maybe when the renders comes back for the full council approval, because he included where the supposed drive-bys meet. And then that way, else the earth can follow, so you can see... And maybe that will help. Well,

[01:49:29] Chair John McAlister: I'm sure they could they could keep me abreast of it along the way too. That'd be another fault. Yeah. I heard someone say that there's no turn on red. What intersection is that? Is that proposed? Is that's a Caltrain thing? So, uh, has that been approved or does cattle train have

[01:49:50] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: the authority in that way? So those have not been approved. Caltrans has approached the city. Um, in general, like, asking us for, uh, discussion about no right, turning red implementation along El Camino, we've been in conversation with Caltrans, Caltrans about that, particularly on the side streets, so no right, turn on red. Um, excuse me, a long El Camino, not on side streets. So none of that has been incorporated yet. I just heard someone from the public. So they wanted

[01:50:22] Chair John McAlister: that or they just,

[01:50:23] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: the public is aware that along El Camino and other jurisdictions, those no right turn on rents are being incorporated, but we have not yet incorporated those.

[01:50:33] Chair John McAlister: And, uh, one of my pet projects is hopefully will get someday, is roundabouts, and I mentioned someone who mentioned roundabouts. So, is there, was there a discussion that earlier on about a roundabout along this section? Yes,

[01:50:48] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: so a couple years ago, the city's BPAC and Los Altos' DPAC at a joint meeting, and in that meeting specifically, roundabouts were discussed at the J Street intersection. That was the only place that that was discussed and we haven't had further discussions about that because that's a Los Altos intersection. Would...

[01:51:10] Chair John McAlister: Okay, yeah, that could be, uh, I think we've had issues with that on, uh, Elmani and Questa are not, uh, Covington. That's always not a lot of room. Have there been any discussion, potentially on the Hollingsworth intersection? Um,

[01:51:26] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: again, this was approved by council, the specific scope, and it was discussed at the previous CTC meetings, and the alternatives that was proposed was this one, where the Mo died. And I don't believe, um, I don't believe roundabouts were approved, but Bathloner voted. Uh,

[01:51:45] Chair John McAlister: defense papers, yes. A lot of cities are starting to go that route, even on major roads come about. Okay, so, um, my general comments are. that, um, we are still a vehicle central centric, uh, state, and uh, road diets have their place, and pedestrians have a, you know, the concerns, and so, but I, I see, we're, uh, every road that we're turning into is turning into a road diet, and We just don't have that many people on bikes. So when people come along and say, well, people are going to ride their bikes. They're not doing it, and that brings to the Y, it costs a lot of money to do that. And I'm just wondering, If that money can be recycled going down, maybe the grants are given for this right now. that there was ways to increase our public transit, our struggle services, to get people moving around and getting out of their cars. Because I see that more likely to happen than people getting on bikes. And if, The knowledge of, we have a very, very low percentage of people riding bikes, yet we're spending a lot of money to get convinced people to go on there. I don't think the city is getting their fair share of money on that direction. We're going to be going into a deficit soon, a year or so. And I want to see us maximize what money we have. And if we only have, say, 5% or less people are riding bikes, and 95 people are using their cars. I think we need to look at our funding to see how we can get those people moving through the city efficiently and potentially with shuttles and greenhouse gases. So, um, that's more of a general statement about all the bike lanes because we did it on California. And I don't think we did a bike survey recently to see what's going on. I would like to see anytime we do a, what was it, a road diet that we put in counters to see how many people are really using the bikes. And if it's 2% or less, then I don't think that's a wise use of our money. And I'm very pragmatic about the approaches that we do. I like bike lanes. I've seen them work well in other cities. Um, But I just hope we're doing, you're doing it out of California, doing it on El Camino, and El Camino, I have a front row seat. So bike lanes, uh, for where that my store is, and I don't see people riding the bike. So they're saying, well, build it, they will come. It's still early. I haven't totally gotten, uh, saying that it was a, a lot of money, but we'll see what happens. And, uh, they don't, oh, does staff anybody? Have you seen bike lanes that are put in mountain view and that you've seen a gradual increase substantially to justify a cost of land? I know safety is priceless. So, we're not putting that aside. But have we seen where we've spent a lot of money on a bike lane, and we're just getting a few people coming through.

[01:54:55] Unknown Speaker: I'd like to know any Calderon Avenue.

[01:54:59] Chair John McAlister: We had a mic lane to look it out, then we had. Yeah, so.

[01:55:06] Chair John McAlister: Cal,

[01:55:07] Chair John McAlister: very narrow street to begin with. Okay, so these are my some of the concerns I'm hearing. Or I feel that, yes, we get all these, and I appreciate the people come virtually, but they're all bike advocates. We don't hear from the general public and I'm gonna say I'm a general public guy that's trying to represent. We got 82,000 people in here, and we're listening to maybe 2000 people, people on bikes. And so we need to make sure that when we do all these roads, that we, uh, appreciate everybody that's out there and I still think we're focusing too much on this across the city. So, so your motion, there's concerns I have on it. Uh, You know, the cutthrough, um, I'm a little concerned about the, turn it into the parking, uh, the, uh, Shopping center is a concern of mine. Now, just to give you some context. 2015. I was mayor. We had a March, March. Oh, March, what am I saying? Um, way, Mark. Marriage, yeah. We had a, we had a, a death. Somebody was driving through and whatever, the lights weren't there. And It took us almost 5 or 6 years to get lights in there. Now, one of the issues was that all the trees dimmed the area. Now, I know you all want trees, and I love trees, and I see some grape trees, and I can, you can talk, you know, we start talking about trees. I can see where the city doesn't even put trees up down Grant Road that they took out years ago. But we have to be very careful about the lighting because there are the trees are causing blind spots and people are will potentially get hurt. And we're doing something on Sleeper and Grant, and the lighting is not there. We have some Greek trees, but that's making those intersections. So, there's always something going on that, you want something, but there's, you know, we have to pay attention to the unintended consequences. So, how can I, um, no, this, I'll just say no to the motion. I'll vote no. I can't support it because there's things that I want to get questioned about, and it sounds like there's more research, there's more money going into it, and I would like to feel more comfortable about the money that we're spending that is fully funded, because I was gone before. I'm just going to keep talking on them. And there's projects that were on the diet on the agenda when I was on council, and there's 4 years later, and they're still not funded and they're still not getting done. And the delays and cost escalations hurts the city and the way we budget our money. So, Ellis, when it comes back, I like to see that this thing is fully funded, or the funds there, because I heard too much stuff. Well, the scopes there. We getting money, some grant money here at the there. And until it's, well, here's a question for them. Are you going to proceed, even though it's not fully funded. On certain project, parts of this project. Question on me? Yes,

[01:58:25] Unknown Speaker: ma'am. So this project is fully funded with the exception of the RFB at Hollingsworth, and the reason why we're going to be seeking additional funds for that is because it is currently an uncontrolled intersection, and we're dropping in a crosswalk. And so I have great safety reservations about dropping in a crosswalk and an uncontrolled intersection and an RFB will be my solution for that. Could

[01:58:47] Chair John McAlister: you help me with that acronym?

[01:58:49] Unknown Speaker: Rapid rectangular flashing beacon. Yes, I was. Now it's a button? Yeah, so it's a button you push and then the flashing lights go off and that alerts vehicles that there's a pedestrian crossing, and it's a safety measure. Okay. And

[01:59:02] Chair John McAlister: that's what's over there at March? Okay. So, um, But other than that, we're funded. Really? Well, okay, how long is it gonna do to continue the scope? She says they were going to revise the scope. So, when do you think this project will start construction? So, We

[01:59:23] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: are anticipating 2027 after obtaining Cal trans approval because it does require design approval and permits from Cal transport. So in 2027,

[01:59:34] Chair John McAlister: do you think costs will escalate by then? And so are you putting in an inflation factor into your budget now?

[01:59:46] Unknown Speaker: We get, we get estimates all along throughout the, the phasing of a project, right? So 30%, 60%, 90%, 100%, we get updated cost estimates at that time. Um, we will finish design prior to actual construction as, as the team said, um, because there is a gap for Caltrans, um, approval, but the direction to the designer will be give us an estimate, you know, at the time that we plan to start construction. And so the intent is to come in. Well, the intent is for the bids to come in at the estimate and for the estimate to be within the amount of money that we have.

[02:00:24] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: I would add that As part of the capital improvement project every year, active projects that are going into construction are reviewed specifically for inflation and cost adjustments. So at that time, staff recommends all of the projects that might need a bump in in cost to get them. At this point, it's important to move forward because we have federal funding attached to this. So, regardless of local concerns over in RFV, which might be in an order of $100,000, we have about $2400000 in federal funding that needs to be spent so that we can get the game of benefit to the community. That funding is potentially at risk. Is

[02:01:08] Chair John McAlister: that money always, okay, that's, I'll take that online. But, um, I'm just, One of my big pushes from me as per council members to always start looking at it. I've seen too many projects delayed and too branding prices going up, and even when you do, that's a lot of money. So we're just, that's the preaching for me. Okay, let's do...

[02:01:28] Member Alison Hicks: I am coming on your comments. Please go right ahead. So I'd like that you're journaling reviewing things. Um, and I do agree that I like that we're doing bike lanes, you know, some East, west, and north, south, you know, some important streets. I do think what we should count, see, you know, how well they're being used. I think we should continually count. Um, and I also think that we should make, you know, review how we're spending money and we should, I don't think it's the same bucket of funds, but I do think that mass transit and how we fund our shuttle is important. I think those are all important subjects. So, I'm glad you brought them up, but I still, oh, and I also think it's important why you said, where you put trees that you don't block visibility and lights. All the things you brought up I think are important, but I still stand by the question is, that's fine. But

[02:02:15] Chair John McAlister: I thank you for those comments, you're welcome. Are you going to say? I want to vote. Okay. You're

[02:02:22] Member Alison Hicks: the chair. You have to say all goes in fa.

[02:02:24] Chair John McAlister: Well, that's the motion. Let's review it and make sure that we get the motion correct, because it's very limited.

[02:02:32] Member Alison Hicks: It's that, uh, it's... Approve the obliminate? Oh, you have it written.

[02:02:37] Chair John McAlister: Approve the preliminary design. Is that correct? Lumineer? there another one?

[02:02:43] Unknown Speaker: Yeah, we're an early, early concept design preliminary design. They're used interchangeable.

[02:02:48] Chair John McAlister: Okay, so that means budget could change. They approved the preliminary design for Elmani Porter Approvements project 21 dash 38 and direct staff to advance the project into final design. All in favor, race. With

[02:03:01] Member Alison Hicks: special consideration on that intersection and on something else that I said. Yeah, whether how to incorporate pedestrians and bicyclists into what was the slip? And

[02:03:12] Chair John McAlister: there was the 2nd or agreed to that. Okay. The comments made by my counsel. Okay. All in favor, raise your hand. Post. Thank you. We will go on to... We're going to... Okay,

5.3 Rengstorff Avenue Grade Separation Project—Cost-Reduction Measures

[02:03:35] Chair John McAlister: we will continue on to our 5.3 Greenstore. Another only but good. All right. Another. So, thank you, staff, for listening, uh, thank you, virtual click now that. Make sure. We just had a discussion about, yeah. Well, I hear all about that. And I'm glad to see Dawn here. You can do that. I told you about the, uh, sounds, I mean... So, uh... Oh, there's this introduction. Robert Gonzalez will give us the principal civil engineer. We'll get a discussion. Please give us the update on the. A rainstore of great separation project, cost reduction measures, and presentation. Oh, joy will be with us on Tom, Silver Ninja, Robert Gonzalez. And maybe Dawn, principal civil engineer. She's trying to hide in the back, cool. No, well, that's that's... So police staff, continue with your presentation. I'd like to eagerly to... Thank you, actually. Joy

[02:05:11] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: Houghton is going to do the presentation today. Okay, great.

[02:05:15] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: Good evening, chair and committee members. My name's Joey Helm, senior civil engineer, and I'm joined here tonight by Robert Gonzalez. Principal, civil engineering, and public works. And we are here to present updates as well as cost production measures for the main Surf Avenue grade separation project. To start with some background, Caltrain currently operates 104 trains per weekday, resulting in 17 minutes of gate downtime per peak hour at Rain Surf Avenue, and creates significant backups. These backups directly impact community access to schools, Services, Rain Surf Park, the community center, and other facilities, Along Rain Surf Avenue. Gate downtimes are expected to increase as cal train service levels increase over time. And the rainstorm avenue grade separation project is being delivered in partnership with BTA and Caltrain, and will improve safety and eliminate crossing delays for pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles due to the gate down times. The project will also eliminate use of train horns apparents 2th Avenue. Ooh,

[02:06:25] Chair John McAlister: then, then.

[02:06:28] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: This project includes depressing the intersection of Ring Surf Avenue and Central Expressway, while maintaining the train tracks at its approximate existing elevation. The project also includes a bicycle pedestrian overcrossing of rainstorf avenue to maintain the connectivity between the east and west sides covering surf avenue. An American with disabilities at compliant pathway from Croissanto Avenue and Ringstorf Park to the lower Ringsdorf Avenue. And realignment of Leland Avenue and utilities connecting to Rankstorf to the south, which staff have been referring to as the Leland connector to maintain vehicular access to and from the La Plaza market in the neighborhood on the west side of Frankstorf. The Raystorf Avenue grade separation started more than 2 decades ago as a feasibility study in 2004. The project has completed 35% design and is progressing to 65% design. At the January 2024 council study sessions that shared a construction cost estimate of 2420000 and the total project cost estimate of 3250000 based on the 35% design planes. With the total cost of 325 million, the project was anticipated to have a funding shortfall of 31 million. Which staff believe could be closed by pursuing grant funding opportunities. In October 2024, the city received updated construction cost estimates for the project based on the 35% design plans, from the contractor and a 3rd party cost estimator. These updates, um, increased the estimated construction cost to $3120000 and the total project cost to $453 million. Coupled with um, Modest increases to other phases of the project, the anticipated funding shortfall increased to 159 million. Staff analysis revealed that the earlier estimate underestimated the construction cost, and did not include the necessary contingencies at that stage of the design. Upon receiving the updated project cost, the project team passed the progress of the design from 35 to 65%, to focus on verifying the cost estimate and also identifying options to reduce the project costs. This verification work is ongoing and it doesn't appear that it will result in any meaningful reduction in the estimate. Currently, some components of the projects are progressing into the 65% design, and staff at this time does not recommend all components to proceed into 65% design until we receive direction, um, or until decisions are made about the potential project 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, um, design details. And elimination and deferral of project elements. This strategy will defer some project elements to be constructed by the city at a later time. The estimated cost saving for each option is preliminary and will require more detailed work to determine actual cost savings. For this reason, the cost savings shown in tonight's presentation should be considered as a rough order of magnitude rather than definitive numbers. It's... The 1st category of cost reduction strategy is construction methods and sequence. The design team has evaluated adjustments, including construction staging, roadway pavement section, sanitary sewer relocation, and single track shoe fly. A shoe fly is a temporary rail line used to bypass a construction site allowing trains to continue operations while the main track is being repaired or replaced. And a single track shoe fly is one rail that will serve both directions allowing only one direction to proceed at the time, temporarily affecting rail service and potentially ridership. The total potential savings from this category is 18.4 million. However, as the single track shoe fly was found infeasible by Caltrain, the potential cost savings that can be realized in this category is approximately 14 million. The 2nd category of the cost reduction strategy is design modifications. various design alternatives have been evaluated to determine potential cost savings. And we recognize that these cost saving options require thoughtful consideration and deliberation, as they will affect the user's experience. The 1st design modification options is the elimination of the meandering pedestrian pathway at Rankstorf Park. If this enhancement is removed, the impact to rainstorf park is reduced, as there is an existing alternate pathway connecting Croissanto Avenue. And a skate park to the lower Brainsdorf Avenue. Which I will share on the next slide, um, elimination of the meandering path results in the cost saving of approximately .8 million. As mentioned previously, the elimination of the meandering pathway from Croissanto to the Lower Ringstorf Avenue, is a practical cost saving alternative, as there is an existing pathway, shown in purple from Croissanto Avenue adjacent to the skate park that connects to Ringstorf Avenue. This existing pathway will be slightly modified to meet the future lower rank Storf Avenue. Another cost reduction option is replacing the retaining wall adjacent to Central Expressway, which sloped in bank. The 35% design included retaining walls up to 22 feet in height, along the Caltrain right away and central Expressway to provide space, initially expected for additional rail lines for a future double tracking by Caltrain. Caltrain determined that the double tracking at Ringstorf is no longer required. And the walls can be modified with slope and maintenance. This design change with bristle and potential cost savings of approximately 4 million. So,

[02:13:38] Chair John McAlister: I'm a little, could you, so where it's up the upper one where it's brown and then below a screen.

[02:13:44] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: Yes, so...

[02:13:46] Chair John McAlister: The upper ones are retaining wall and then... Yes,

[02:13:48] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: so there are walls, um, along Central Expressway at, uh, where the Caltrain right away is, and then the cost savings would be reducing those, and they would be sloping, um, closer to the lowered, um, grade. A lot. Thank you. The potential cost savings in the design modification category is $4.8 million. The 3rd cost reduction strategy is elimination or deferral of project elements. Further near term cost reductions can be realized by reducing the project's scope, and defying elements that could be constructed by the city in future phases. One project element that can be eliminated and deferred as the future project. It's the retaining wall at the gas station. I say, is it feasible for the gas station to remain, with the proposed lowering of rain surf avenue and central expressway intersection. This property will need to be acquired for the project. Used for this parcel remains undetermined and deferring the construction of the walls and stairs that this property can result in a potential cost savings of 13 million. The city or future developer can construct and regrade the site in the future when the use for the property is determined. Another element that can be eliminated from the scope and deferred as a future project is the bicycle pedestrian bridge. This bridge connects Croissanto Avenue and Ringsdorf Park to the La Plaza market and the neighborhood on the west side of Ringsdorf Avenue. Different construction of this bridge and stairway can result in a cost savings of approximately 2 million. The potential cost savings from this category is approximately 3.3 million. However, the bicycle pedestrian bridge maintains the connectivity of the neighborhood to the park providing substantial value to the community. Staff does not recommend moving forward with this alternative, given the marginal cost savings, and substantial community benefits. The total potential cost savings for the recommended alternative in this category is one.3 million. During the value engineering efforts, um, staff continue to work with Caltrain to review the project construction schedule to determine that if the construction phase can be reduced. This effort resulted in reducing construction duration from 3 years to 2.5 years, which also reduces the indirect costs associated with the construction duration. In addition, contingencies and fees have been adjusted to reflect their proportional relation to the total construction cost. Approximately 38000000 in additional cost savings were identified. And included in the revised project costs on this next slide. Um, the recommended cost production measures presented. Will provide a total of 58.1 million. The total savings of 58.100000 reduces the project cost from 453 to 395 million. A total of 296000000 in funding has been secured, or is anticipated, um, resulting in a new project shortfall of 99 million. If the city council approves the recommended

[02:17:32] Member Ellen Kamei: cost reduction measures. The

[02:17:34] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: greatest risk of rising project costs is delay, um, with estimates showing an annual increase of 9 to 14 billion. If full construction begins after 2027. While final design and right away acquisition are fully funded and will take 18 to 24 months. The city can reduce cost escalation by progressing with these phases while securing additional funding. Additionally, early construction of certain components, such as utility relocations and the Leland Avenue realignment can help mitigate cost increases and keep the project on track for full construction. Staff will continue collaborating with the project team to explore cost saving measures during the design phase, and will present hand recommendations to counsel for approval in fall 2025 before fully proceeding into 65%. Community outreach events will be scheduled to keep our residents informed as the project moves forward into final design. And in parallel staff, um, will advance right away acquisition, and pursue early work opportunities to help reduce future cost escalation. And this brings us to staff recommendation that the city council approves staff recommendations for cost reduction measures for the regular avenue rate separation project. This concludes tonight's presentation and we'd be happy to answer questions we have. Thank you. Thank

[02:19:14] Chair John McAlister: you for bringing that up. Um, any members of the community have any questions? Yes, please. So

[02:19:23] Member Alison Hicks: these are great. We should do cost production analysis all the time. Um, it was very clear. I only have a couple questions, but do you know what, I know you're not like the landscaping department, but do you know what, um, kinds of landscaping can be done on the sloped embankments? I've heard it's kind of limited, but any idea?

[02:19:46] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: We may be able to do some very low planting, but the sloped embankments are within the Caltrain right away, and my understanding is they try to avoid trees because they do have overheadlines. They hang over what? They have overhead lines, supporting the electric rail. But you can do more than just grass or something. I believe so. You know, you're not, though. But we will continue to coordinate that with.

[02:20:12] Member Alison Hicks: Yeah, I'd love to keep in touch with that and it, you know, looks much better on the sketches and, you know, I think it has great potential to really make the, the whole area better. Um, Can we use the shell gas station for paperball?

[02:20:33] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: Theoretically, we could use lots of places for pickleball. So that is, that is on the radar. You said it out loud now. Okay,

[02:20:42] Member Alison Hicks: those are my questions.

[02:20:46] Chair John McAlister: I will, uh, I'll go ahead and continue with my questions. Um, so just to put things in context. I was here in 2014. When this project was one point, or $120 million. So, if you refer back to the lab project where I was concerned about escalating costs, They're still there. And, um, so, um, my question is, so, go on, on this one. Um, so we still haven't, have we bought any of the right away on any of it so far? We

[02:21:29] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: have purchased one property at 134 South Brain store through a voluntary sale. And could we bring

[02:21:37] Chair John McAlister: that up, please? Do you have that somewhere there? If you're ready, I can, uh, let you talk, I can follow up there. I'm

[02:21:47] Member Ellen Kamei: really the mood stopper. Oh,

[02:21:48] Chair John McAlister: okay. No, not all time.

[02:22:00] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: I may not have a slide to show.

[02:22:02] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: point at it. I mean, that's just, so in terms of right away acquisition, we have a, we have a list of partial and full takes that we need to acquire as part of this project, and so we've strategically worked out with VTA and with our partners at California. Which one?

[02:22:23] Chair John McAlister: Manfall. Oh, somebody from Mountain Vehicle. Oh, okay. Goodbye. Yes, sorry about that. Okay, done that, 1st thing come. Okay, so, but you haven't, you.

[02:22:38] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: 134 is where, um, Leland Connector, the future Leland Connector will be. Is that some homes being taken out? A residential property has been purchased. Correct. Okay. Um, okay, because I know that, okay. And and other than the shell station, was there any other property that needs to be, um, what?

[02:23:02] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: Yes, as as I was mentioning, we have a list of partial and full takes. The shell is probably the most prominent full take that we need to negotiate. Um, so we begin with those, uh, willing sellers. Um, the La Plaza market is the other one that is, uh, predominant here where we would be, um, modifying their parking lot. Yeah. Well, like taking it away for a time and then replacing it in common. So that takes effort, that takes design, that takes some planning to do. Um, so that would be another one that we need to strategize. Okay. I

[02:23:42] Chair John McAlister: don't know, just, do you guys have any definitive costs for all these items? As you're talking about, okay, but right away, it's gonna, yeah. Are you going with 19, $24, or 20, $24? And you're going with October 20, $24. Yes.

[02:23:59] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: For the right away. So

[02:24:01] Chair John McAlister: it's 35 million. Okay. Yes. Okay, on that one. So, thank you on that, because that, okay. All these numbers are. Yes. Estimates.

[02:24:19] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: Preliminary estimates, based on 35% design plants. That's

[02:24:24] Chair John McAlister: just getting cut. coming from VTA and everything's suggested over that. So we're good, we're doing our best guests, right? And are we doing our guest best, uh, because you have, uh, so many unfunded, our plan items that we haven't perceived with money yet, that, What was that 1st to your plan, plan, plan? Yeah, man. So

[02:24:54] Member Ellen Kamei: this this project has come to councils to see new rice. And part of the issue was that the original estimate from Caltrans was 50% over what they have original, right? Wasn't it? It was 50% over what they had originally told, the city and the partners. And so we are in the position of having to do all these cost productions because of the egregious calculations from Caltrans. And so now we're to make this move forward. So that's why I have no questions because staff has been continually trying to come back to how find a path forward, but I would say this isn't from, in my opinion, it's not from the city side. It's from the Caltran side, who hired a consultant that was off by 70, 75000000 dollars. I'm looking to our former public works director, and I try to provide that color. Because I think everything we're talking about today is how do we continue talking about how to reduce it? We're not... But because of but because of them. And so I would say it's nothing on the city side, I think we've been nothing more than creative and scrappy and how we're trying to make this go for scrappy. Oh, scrappy. I never heard crappy all time. No, scrappy. on how we've been able to go forward. And so I'll just turn it over to staff. So that's why at this point, you know, no further questions from me because I just wanted to keep proceeding because the more that we don't, the more we might face what we face prior with Caltrans and I just want to... Don't worry. on this project, but I just, yeah, just go. Yeah,

[02:26:34] Assistant City Manager Cameron: so good evening. Chairperson and committee members. Don Cameron, assistant city manager. Um, I I want to note a few things. I appreciate what member can may had to say about the source of our estimates and some of our concerns in the past and why we saw such huge new estimates come in. But one of the things I will say about the new estimates that we're working with is the previous estimates were prepared by design engineers. And, um, we don't know why that they were so underestimating the costs. But what we do know is what's happened since is Caltrain has brought on a general contractor. It's called construction manager, a general contractor. It's, uh, been looking at all the cost estimates from a contractor's perspective and contacting vendors and validating the costs. And one of the reasons we got the big jump of costs, is they're the ones that did the reality check and said, no, it's really going to cost this. So one of the things we do have going for us now with these new cost estimates is it's, it has more validation by actual general contracting firm that delivers these types of projects. And two, an answer to one of your other questions about the time period of the cost estimate as, as senior engineer Houghton said, um, This estimate now for us is good as long as we can start full construction by the end of 2027. So we built in enough escalation to account for, we spend the next 2 years finishing up final design and right away. And, you know, yes, it's going to be a challenge filling that funding gap and we're working on that as much as we can. We are successful. Um, we have at least counted, accounted for potential escalation through 2027. So. Why

[02:28:32] Chair John McAlister: do we have you up there? Are you involved with the conversations about measured being laid with the other cities and the, uh, You

[02:28:39] Assistant City Manager Cameron: mean, in terms of the share, that Mountain View's receiving of the measure breed? And the delays that?

[02:28:46] Chair John McAlister: train is causing, uh, on the way? Yes,

[02:28:51] Assistant City Manager Cameron: we have been having active discussions both at the VTA level and with Caltrain interns of, you know, the fact that it's not just us. It's other cities as well that have great separations in progress, that have seen major cost escalation, and a Burlingame is really a prime example, one that was in final design and thought they'd be in construction this year and received an estimate double. They thought it was going to be about a year ago. Um, and as a result of that, there was even a meeting last week that involved, um, city leadership from 9 cities that have active grade separations with Caltrain to really talk about improving our partnerships and working with Caltrain to, um, on moving, getting projects delivered more quickly. And really looking at being more cost effective, as well as starting that engagement of all of us as cities talking about, we need, we all need more funding and starting to look for opportunities to achieve our goals. So

[02:29:54] Chair John McAlister: they're, they're being more expeditious on their planning reviews and so forth. That's that's part of the goal. Okay. Um, on here, it says, measure, measure B money, $171,10000 plan. What does plan mean? But then, The

[02:30:14] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: plant is the remaining of the city share of the 2016 measure B real grade separation program funds. We've expended some of it on the castro grade separation designs. Um, we've expended some of it on the design for a race surf as well. So the 171 I believe is the remaining of the city's share of measure B funds. That's been allocated

[02:30:39] Chair John McAlister: from by VTA, authorized? That's, if

[02:30:44] Assistant City Manager Cameron: I may, what's happened is there was an agreement a few years ago of how the measure would be great separation money would be split among the 3 cities, and that resulted in Mountain Bay receiving 25% of that particular funding source. So that is, well, not technically allocated, it's our share. What VTA has been doing is budgeting the money in 2 year increments based upon what we need for our next phase. So, basically, we've been promised that money, and we will receive it and be allocated it through the budgeting process as we're ready to proceed into that phase and use the money. Okay. And

[02:31:27] Chair John McAlister: that goes along with the other money that's planned. That's P U C, grade separation graph, and the city, well, that's our own funding. $30000000 Okay, one other question I had. I'll cut to the chasing bit for you, mayor. So, the one question on Predestrian Bridge, the connection across, Did you bring up that diagram for me? Okay, so the one in purple? Yes. So, that is how much? Two million. $2 million? Okay, so how much further down? Does that get us to the, so it says ringstorf there? You got to cross it. The the signal? How far is that bridge to the signal that turns into the community center? I

[02:32:20] Member Ellen Kamei: say it's several 100 feet. 300 perhaps. Okay. So, so

[02:32:28] Chair John McAlister: have people go another 300 feet. potentially, instead of putting that bridge in there, and how many people, and is that gonna potentially gonna serve just that community? So people crossing it, they're just gonna

[02:32:44] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: go into that community. So we know that there's a lot of, um, uh, movement between the areas, um, East of Brainstorf and West of Brainstorf, accessing the La Puzzle market as well as going to and from, uh, the 2 communities. So some of that is accessed via Stanford, but a lot of it is accessed through the park. So if you're at the park, you see a lot of people with bags from the market, you see a lot of people moving to the market, young families, like people folks. So when you, I'm

[02:33:15] Chair John McAlister: really driving my term on this council is the drive it cost. How many people you've seen? How much is it gonna be affected by if they went down to the signal and came on? How aggressive? How aggressive is this cost? Because to me, we're really serious. That bridge, they just walk up, you got a path, but you showed earlier that they could come down to the signal and walk across. So when you say quantify the people. Neighborhood or the general public at all, you know. So, This is a rhetorical question. So I'm just giving you an idea where I'm coming from, because I think this, this is a tremendous need because the trains are gonna get quicker. It isn't time delayed. Cars are sitting there idling, there's, you know, gases. We need to get this done. And we were all excited when back in 2015, we thought we were moving ahead on this thing. And now I've just seen too many costs, escalates, too many things delayed, delayed, delayed. And so, I want to, I would like to see, um, I can't, I'm not going to support the motion because I want to see a real aggressive cost canal, real nailing down the numbers so that when this comes back, uh, in my retirement, that you, when you, let's get this done, and that's what across the board. I know you're doing the best, but we got to nail down the numbers, where it's coming from, so that when the opportunity comes, we can jump on it, because back then I keep it. We all thought we were almost, uh, we were so ready compared to Sunnyvale and the laws of Palo Alto. We were that far ahead ready to go. And then things gone sideways. So, if

[02:34:58] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: I may, um, we're partners with BTA on this and we're bringing them in as um, engineering specialists. So they do a lot of bar, they're doing the bar expansion. They do a lot of work that they not just fun, but also engineer. So we're bringing them along. And they looked at this as well, alongside us, we looked very carefully at all of the cost cutting measures. So we have done the aggressive cost cutting that we want. And the bike bed bridge is a good example of this because we looked at that and we weren't going to, um, shy away from proposing that as a potential, uh, maneuver. The city can deliver a $2000000 bridge. And if we were, if we were $2000000 short of our goal, we would absolutely see that as a way to, to, to, to make up the difference. So if there's other ways that we can do that, We will absolutely move forward between 35 and 65. But I think what, um, uh, uh, Vice mayor Cameron is about to tell me, is that... sorry.

[02:35:58] Assistant City Manager Cameron: But no, I never wanted elected office. I'm sorry, I apologize.

[02:36:01] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: I got your, what I've been, the emphasis I want to make at this point is that time is not on our side. Time

[02:36:10] Assistant City Manager Cameron: is money. Correct. Right. And what I would like to build on, and I believe you were headed to too, is the reason we're bringing this to you tonight is because we will not be able to continue refine the costs and nailing down until we get through 65% design. This is why, uh, senior Jerry Houghton continues to mention, this is based upon 35% side, which is still too conceptual. So, we are requesting, um, your support and then counsel's approval to make these, for instance, design changes, so we can finish getting through 65% design, which will provide the critical infor-, you know, a level of design we need to continue to nail down the numbers. Okay,

[02:36:59] Chair John McAlister: I can understand 65, but how are you getting there? Do we have the? Yeah, so these numbers here, I think, for the full project or for the kids of the 65%? These

[02:37:10] Senior Civil Engineer Houghton: are numbers based on the 35% design, as I mentioned earlier, they are rough order of magnitude numbers, so they're not definitive.

[02:37:21] Chair John McAlister: Okay. I think I've conveyed my thoughts and so we can go to virtual. Are anybody in house would like any com- anybody here discuss? No. Anybody virtual would like to ask any questions. No race chance. Okay, then we will bring it back to the committee. Oh, uh, helmets, motions. I

[02:37:55] Member Alison Hicks: make my, I'm saying. You've made lessons, but second. I make my connection to accept them. It's better than it did before.

6.2 Committee Comments

[02:38:05] Chair John McAlister: I, again, will vote, no, because I would like to see something much more aggressive and more, um, not necessarily the what you're not cutting. I'd rather see, maybe I should say. I like to see some numbers, dollars. inflation, realistic things, because it's very hard for me to see something, which I know was 150 at one time. It's gone up to here. And if we want to get it done, we really got to nail down our funding. And that's always out of our control. We're at the mercy of many. So, okay. Uh, it's 2 to one. Vote. So, um, motion passes. Would you like to take an official note? Oh, we raised your hands. 4. And one against. Not against the project. Just, I need more detail. I want this project to go, because it's, it's one of our thorough, it's our only thoroughfare that's realistic, because to get people going north, south through city, or all the other people coming through, and the, the, the, separation at Castro is just with my, Community comments. Like 6.2s committee comments, do any of the committee members have comments or report to share with the committee? I have a staff comment. Please.

6.1 Staff Comments

[02:39:31] Unknown Speaker: So in 2016, voters overwhelmingly approved measure B with nearly 72% support. Measure B is a 30, 30 year, half cent countywide sales tax, and it's going to fund projects that enhance transit, highways, expressways, and active transportation, which is bicycles, pedestrians, and complete streets. As you heard earlier, a portion of measure B will go towards the gray store project as well. Well, the VTA board of directors sets policy decisions for 2016 measure B, voters entrusted the MBCOC. So I think that's a citizens oversight committee, to provide oversight to ensure that the 2016 measure B funds are spent according to the ballot language, and to keep voters informed about program compliance. So this note is to let everybody know that the VTA is soliciting members for their citizens oversight committee, I believe there is a sheet attached to the agenda. Uh, with contact information if anybody is interested in joining that committee. Or would like to apply for the committee. Thank you. Well,

[02:40:34] Chair John McAlister: thank you. That is a very important committee. Does that measure B money was hard fought by the city of Mountain View and all the other small cities, because San Jose wanted a chunk of the money, and we all ended. Supervisor Joe Smidian helped lead the cause, and Mountain was there to keep a cap on how much money it was going to bark. And that's, uh, it was a, we're going there. Okay? I'm sorry, I didn't read that part of this. I'm gonna say, but thank you. Okay, I will come back then, item 6.2. Any comments from the people? I have a question.

[02:41:09] Member Alison Hicks: Uh, remember the public uh, commented on the Ameswell Bridge. Is that ever gonna come to us in any form? Look at it. It is fully approved and... It's under instruction. Yeah, it's it's like... Yeah, almost done. Yeah, it's almost open. Ribbon

[02:41:28] Unknown Speaker: cutting, maybe? Um, it's a bridge that is over by the Ainswell Hotel. Oh, that one, yeah. Yes,

7. ADJOURNMENT

[02:41:34] Chair John McAlister: that was... I keep throwing it. It goes back, right, Dawn? Okay. But anyway, okay, so we finished that one. We will, we've done that. I was like, adjourned. Thank you so much for joining us. Our next council transportation committee will be on December 2nd. His meeting is adjourned at 846. Thank you for all coming. Thank you.