May 5, 2026 Council Transportation Committee

Video

Agenda

• 3. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC: There were no public speakers in-person or virtually. (00:00:51)
• 4. MINUTES APPROVAL (00:00:52)
• 4.1 Approve Meeting Minutes: M/S - McAlister/Kamei - To approve the Council Transportation Committee meeting minutes of December 2, 2025. (00:00:52)
• 5. NEW BUSINESS (00:00:52)
• 5.1 Amend and Add New Sections to Article X (Transportation Demand Management) of Chapter 19 (Motor Vehicles and Traffic) of the Mountain View Municipal Code to Establish a Citywide TDM Program: Transportation Planner Pacho and Assistant Public Works Director Boyer provided a presentation on the Amendment of New Sections to Article X (Transportation Demand Management) of Chapter 19 (Motor Vehicles and Traffic) of the Mountain View ... (00:00:52)
• 5.2 Middlefield Road Complete Streets, Project 22-01: Associate Civil Engineer Nguyen provided a presentation on the Middlefield Road Complete Streets, Project 22-01. Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales and Assistant Public Works Director Arango responded to Committee questions. (01:08:06)
• 6. COMMITTEE/STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS, UPDATES, REQUESTS, AND COMMITTEE REPORTS (02:43:06)
• 6.1 Staff Comments: There were no staff comments. (02:43:06)
• 6.2 Committee Comments: Member McAlister shared photos of interesting designs which he had observed. The following member of the public spoke: Valerie Fenwick (02:43:47)
• 7. ADJOURNMENT: At 8:47 p.m., Chair Hicks adjourned the meeting. (02:46:37)

Transcript

3. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC

[00:00:51] Unknown Speaker: Three, which is oral

5.1 Amend and Add New Sections to Article X (Transportation Demand Management) of Chapter 19 (Motor Vehicles and Traffic) of the Mountain View Municipal Code to Establish a Citywide TDM Program

[00:00:52] Chair Alison Hicks: communications. This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the committee on any matter not on the agenda. Speakers are allowed to speak on any topic for up to 3 minutes. During this section, state law prohibits the committee from acting on non-agenda items. With any member, that means if you say something interesting, we can't respond to you. Um, would any member of the public on the line like to provide comment on a non-agenda items? If so, please click the raised hand button and zoom or approach the lectern. If you are here in person. We will take in-person speakers first. Staff will display the timer on the screen. And I believe we're doing 2 minutes. So are there any in-person speak. on general public time. Okay, seeing none? Are there any vegetables? No hand, please. Okay. Um, in in that case, we will move on to item number four, which is approval of meeting minutes. So the minutes for the December 2nd, 2025 meetings are presented for approval tonight. Would any member of the public joining us either virtually or in person, like flights on Atlanta Max. Anybody in person? Anybody? Julian. Then I'll bring the item back for midi deliberation. action. Are there any corrections or comments on the minutes, uh, among committee members? Not can I see a motion to do? So much. I think all those in favor. Okay, has this unanimously. Um, we'll now move on to new business. 5.one one of our new business is to amend and add new sections to article 10. Which is the transportation demand management. So article 10, chapter 19, 19 is the motor vehicles in traffic. Section of the Mountain View municipal code to establish a citywide TDM program. TDM standing for transportation, demand management. So, um, Let's see. Okay, the next part of my script is a little repetitive, but also if there's anything that I need to read here. Item 51 is start on demand and add new section start, 10 transportation, demand management, chapter 15. This appears to be what I already just told. Um, the staff presentation will be provided by Valcacho, transportation planner, and Alison Boyer, assistant.

[00:04:09] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: So Good evening, my name is Allison Boyer. I am the assistant public works director for Transportation Business Services, and I have with me tonight, Ben Pasho, who is our senior transportation planner, and we also have our consultant, Natalie McCarvel, and principal consultant, and Jeff England, who is vice president of program operations from Steer, joining us remotely to help answer questions. Um, and we're here trying to discuss the drop citywide transportation demand management coordinates. No. Okay. So city council identified the development of a transportation demand management ordinance as a strategic priority for fiscal year is 2023 and 2025. It was identified as a priority as a result of the city's 2030 general plan. The greenhouse gas production program. Sustainability action plan were sat for precise plans as well as regional and state laws. To date, the city's approach to TDM spans a mix of project 5 and land use types. There are over 27 entitled development projects in Mount View that have requirements as part of their conditions of approval. These current media requirements. different targets and measures. The proposed. Uh, sorry, the proposed ordinance alliance with the existing policies and and strategizing TDM standards and monitoring requirements. It insurance consistency with the MTA handbook, the BMT screenings, and the city's greenhouse gas reduction program. Well, also standardizing trip reduction targets, the TDM planning process, and monitoring influencement for monitoring and enforcement provisions. So reviewing the project workflow, staff is currently in the project based focus on developing the ordinance language, seeing here in blue. Over the course of the project, staff has engaged key stakeholders and advisory bodies to gain a broad understanding of current practice with TDM, as well as how requirements can be further streamlined and made more effective after the ordinance. Key insights were gathered from the downtown business association and the TMA. One-on-one interviews were held with developers, employers, property managers and community members. Collectively, the input gathered has been used to guide the direction of the project, including its vision and goals in the tedium framework. Staff presented the project Vision and Goals to BPAC, EPC, and CTC in quarter 4 of 2023. Or members voice their support for the project's objectives. In quarter one of 2025, staff returned to BPAC and EPC to present the TDM policy framework that includes trip production standards, reporting elements, and enforcement provisions. CTC and city council reviewed and supported the proposed framework in quarter 2 and quarter 3 of 2025. Staff will present the TDM ordinance to council for the 1st and 2nd reading in May of 2026. Division statement. which went to CTC on January 30th, 2024 states that the TDM ordnance will seek to reduce single occupancy vehicle trips for new development and increased use of multimodal transportation alternatives that are sustainable, equitable, effective, and respond to the changing demands. The goal of the project is, we're informed by existing conditions of analysis and date. And then the staff recommendations, which is a little different than what you read is, um, the staff is recommending that city council adopt an ordinance of the city council repealing and reenacting, chapter 19, over vehicles and tracking, of article 10, transportation demand management of the city code, to establish a citywide PDM program, and finding the amendments to be exempt from the sequel pursuant to sequel guidelines, section 15. Sorry, 15308. Oh,

[00:08:46] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: sorry. Next line. One more. So

[00:08:55] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: a quick overview of the TV. At a high level, the TDM framework seeks to streamline and implement TDM requirements across the project's lifespan from the entitlement phase to the post occupancy phase. The new TDM ordinance will apply to all new development modifications, change of use, and expansions of existing sites, generating 200 or more net new average daily trips or ADT. This will apply across all land uses, residential, commercial, and mixed use. There are, however, a couple exemptions. Those are for 100% affordable units, very small projects, which are classified as single family developments of 12 units or fewer, multifamily residential developments, 20 units or fewer, or any office development that is 10,000 square feet or less. As well as patron driven projects, which with use is less than 100,000 square feet. Projects will have to demonstrate a plan to reduce projected ADT by 20 to 50% through the use of approved TDM strategies and maintain program management and annual reporting post-occupancy. The city will meet, um, the city will maintain records of annual project ports and any non-compliance may result in corrective action and or find the best by the city. Next slide. The production targets will be, we'll be determined by size of the project and they're divided into 3 categories. Small projects are 200 to 499 ADT. Medium projects are 500 to 999 T, and large projects, which are 100. I'm sorry, which are a 1080 T. Projects will be required to implement TDM strategies that reduce ADT to the following levels of 3040 and 50% respectively. TOD or transit oriented design projects and residential projects. We'll have reduction target levels of 20, 30, and 40% respectively. These thresholds were informed by the city, existing precise plan targets, as well as case studies, similar TDM programs in San Francisco, San Mateo County, Redwood City, and the city of San Jose. Next one. Prior to the entitlement, prospective applicants will be required to submit the TDM plan for city review. Specifics of the TM plan will then be included in the conditions of approval preceding adoption by counsel. TDM plan will be comprised of 2 types of strategies. Core strategies offer an array of flexible, proven trip production strategies that applicants may select from to develop a project's TDM plan. Some examples of core strategies include transportation subsidies and ban pool incentives. The auxiliary measures, which, when paired with core strategies, are complementary and more effective at producing art. Uh, and more effective ever using trips. Some examples of auxiliary strategies are wayfinding improvements and transportation related marketing events. Applicants will have access to the TDM toolkit, which is designed to offer a menu of strategies that vary in scale and cost, allowing projects to create site-specific TDM plans fit for their purposes. Slide. Moving into the monitoring elements of the framework, this slide illustrates the various reporting activities that projects will be responsible for, which are again organized based on project size. Small projects must report out annually for 3 years, medium projects for 10 and large projects for 20. Additionally, residential and patron driven uses are exempt from additional project performance monitoring, conducted through annual travel surveys and traffic counts. And with that, I pass up. Thanks,

[00:13:02] Transportation Planner Pacho: Allison. So staff would like to note a few key updates, which have been incorporated into the TDM policy paperwork based on feedback we've received since last student's study session of council. And propose changes include exemptions, such as for patronship and uses, implementation of housing, action items, exemptions from site-pacific trip cops for residential and patient human uses. Updates to enforcement provisions and optional TMA numbers. For the 1st update, Proposed patron driven uses less than net to what, 100,000 square feet, that will be exempted from this medium program. Categorized as non-residential. These project types, did we generate trips that are primarily vacation, customers, rather than by employees. Examples of such projects would include childcare centers, restaurants, entertainment, medical, retail, including general merchandise and groceries, well as other personal services. This exemption was incorporated into the framework recognizing the value of such pieces that are neighborhood serving and also support economic by attracting and retaining high quality retail. And other service oriented uses. The next update relates to the city's housing element program, which went into effect in 2023. Provisions of the housing club require the city to adopt a TDM ordinance to help identify lower cost options for developers to maintain requirements. And to support this effort, the ornaments will allow residential parking reductions and exemptions for budgets that enhance features of a TDM plan, which would achieve a higher level of trip reduction over and beyond the minimum harm. To satisfy the enhanced CDM criteria, residential project was either one, exceed its ADT reduction target by at least 5%, or to adopt one additional course strategy and 2 additional auxiliary strategies over the minimum required number from the toolkit. The enhanced team criteria presented. are really intended to incentivize higher levels of trip reduction and reduce parking demand while increasing mobility options for residential projects. And the next update to the primary completes exemptions for monitoring and reporting requirements for residential education trivial uses. Specifically, all residential and patient driven uses will be exempted from meeting site specific trip caps and associated ADT reduction variants. The exemptions also extend to the requirements provide travel surveys and conduct shopping accounts. The noted exemptions here reflect existing conditions and local and state regulations, which seek to collectively reduce financial costs and administrative burdens related to delivering more affordable housing. And neighborhood serving nuisance. However, so required of these projects will be the requirements to adopt and implement tedium and provide ongoing annual tedium reporting and occurrence. And then moving ahead. The proposed ordinance seeks to align the enforcement provisions under city code enforcement violations and administrative penalties. This approach aligns with neighbor jurisdictions, which also codify violations of not compliance, as the basis for administrative citations for under the Munich code. So, some examples of non-compliance might include failure of a project to submit annual tedium modern reports, or maintain an ongoing TDM plan. Additionally, updated enforcement provisions will consistently apply to all projects, subject to ordinance, rather than by specific projects. For the next framework update, composed ordinance will not require projects that pay size to join the teaming. Membership in the teammate will be optional. and included in the TDM tool kit. To incentivize new projects to join as a way to satisfy the team or party interpret. So while TMA membership will not be required, staff will work with the TMA to explore the process of establishing a property-based assessment digit repeat. Following adoption of the audience. Similar to other jurisdictions, such as city of Emerville. The goal of establishing the PBI will be to provide a long-term and scalable approach to funding TMA provided services, including the MEGO shuttle. Most notably, a P-Bid would support for membership in the teammate over time. By clearly defining its governance structure and assessment and membership fees. Currently, staff is working with a project team to develop a cost estimation and implementation planning studies part of this work. The study will evaluate the range of city, staff time, and administrative resources required to administer the ordinance, including TDM plan review and ongoing monitoring. The findings of this report will inform the basis of an annual EDMP, which will be intended to recover a portion of the city's punk white costs associated with implementing. Following completion of the speech study, South will draft a resolution for the city council to review. What the cheating ordinance is in effect, its provisions and putting your production standards and monitoring requirements will be codified in the city code. Additionally, the TVM program standards will be a key guiding document, supplement the citywide TDM. The TDM program standards document will be an appendix to the MTA hammer, which may be updated periodically to reflect changes in travel patterns. technological innovation. and TDMS practices. And then for next steps, um, I'll pass it back to your house. So

[00:18:54] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: following the CBC review tonight, we will be taking this ordinance to counsel for comment or for the 1st read on May 12th and the 2nd reading on May 26th, and anticipating final adoption of the ordinance in May of 2026, with it going into effect in June 26th. Once adopted, implementation steps will include development and refinement of the TDM program standards and the TDM toolkit, updating the precise plans, entity code to implement housing, element fiction items, and ordinance provisions, presenting the annual TDMP resolution to counsel forwarding, review, and adoption. Exploring the feasibility of establishing a property-based assessment district where P big city wide. Integration with the city's permitting and entitlement processes. And it's the establishment of ongoing monitoring and reporting systems, including identifying technology solutions and providers. And coordination with stakeholders and regional partners. Then... And then again, we're here, um, Staff is recommending a city council adopted ordinance of the city council, repealing and reenacting chapter 19, motor vehicles and traffic, of article 10, transportation, demand management, of the city code to establish a citywide TDM program, and binding the amendments to be exempt from sequel pursuant to sequel guidance, lines of section 15308. That is

[00:20:34] Chair Alison Hicks: our staff presentation. Okay, thank you very much. That is, uh, always an exciting, um, project for me to see how, how our transportation demand management, uh, program evolves. So, I will now, uh, We will now, uh, take questions from committee members, do take committee members, have questions. That's number, McAllister. Thank

[00:21:04] Committee Member John McAlister: you for the report. Feel comfortable. So, um, Um, um, on slide 12. Versus parking reduction in parking productions. Are we interpreting strictly by what the housing element? Says we, what they can do, or are we making a fraud or select system? Other things related to the parking.

[00:21:31] Transportation Planner Pacho: So the housing element includes, I believe, 3 action items. One is to identify lower cost options for developers to meet their team requirements. And then also identify criteria for projects that are qualified for these parking reductions and exemptions from parking minimums. So the ordinance here really kind of operationalizes that and the plan criteria would be these projects too. That's not...

[00:21:59] Committee Member John McAlister: Everything else. This is the only one I have sort of a concern on because it's a broader picture of. If we're building these units, And there's restriction that other, and they don't have parking, parking's gonna flow into the neighborhoods. And so the quality of life, and the congestion of safety of people, all the cars around, is a concern to me. Is there any way we can do both protect the neighborhood, the traffic and the cars and so forth? And still meet this requirement? Right.

[00:22:29] Transportation Planner Pacho: So the resident, the residential ATT targets are set so that sufficient TDM strategies would be needed to be put in place to offset any parking. Offset any demand for additional parking immediately. So the idea is to qualify for these parking uh parking reductions and exceptions. Um, they would either have to, again, one. Um, meet a higher level of trip production over and beyond what's required. Or adult additional strategies. So the idea is that reduced parking or no parking is in a TM programming in itself. You and me is not... Okay, it's not a TV program. It's sufficient. It's not it's necessary, but it's not sufficient. And so enough TDM measures would need to be adopted. to offset any additional demand for market. So,

[00:23:21] Committee Member John McAlister: they can get the reduced park. They have to offset it with, oh, okay. Additional strategies

[00:23:26] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: or percentage of production. Uh, is. Has

[00:23:33] Committee Member John McAlister: anybody reached out to our partners, like BTA? If we start ramping this up, they will look and see what they can ramp up for BTA's out of struggles right now. Um, and so, but is that something that we're going to keep them as part of the loot so that we do something, or see a project that they might say, we can ask them beforehand. So when the planning process, we can say, hey, we're anticipating this. Can you look at around? The

[00:24:05] Transportation Planner Pacho: ordinance doesn't preclude any coordination of PTA? And so, BT is actually working on a equitable VNT mitigation program at a regional level. And that framework is being, I think, developed in coordination with, what is it, AB 130 also sets a statewide program for VMT reduction. So all of these are strategies that are kind of being developed in the offing. And then once they get more concrete and certain things of communication, certainly kind of engage them on when it would be needed. Um, to start then opening up the option for these developers up into that strategy. Thank you. That's it. Remember

[00:24:45] Chair Alison Hicks: commit? Do you have questions?

[00:24:48] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Okay, I have I have several. Um, one is, uh, one is, How, um, What the opportunity will be to add additional tools to the tool kit? Uh, over time, how that will work. Right. So, since

[00:25:11] Transportation Planner Pacho: EPC, we've...

[00:25:13] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Or subtract, if they're not working out.

[00:25:15] Transportation Planner Pacho: Certainly. It's very open ended. I mean, since EBC, we've added additional 5 or 6 strategies. So it's it's a moving target. Which is to say, I mean, these could be updated on a cadence, which makes sense. It could be on a yearly basis. But certainly once we begin monitoring, we'll understand the performance of these strategies, which makes sense where easier for projects to adopt. Yeah,

[00:25:40] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: so the toolkit is envisioned to be evergreens. So we can update it as either new strategies become common in the area or new technologies come about or new state A, B, regulations come down the pipeline. But, uh, the idea is as we also collect data from the reports coming in, we can also identify what are working. What is working and we can also address those percentages with their ATP reductions, or if we see developers really like one and they keep bringing up bringing it up and it's not in our toolkit, we can add it so that it's identified there. So it is intended to be an evergreen, what the cadence is of updating it. We haven't quite figured out, but I think we'll. We'll see where that takes us in our 1st year.

[00:26:29] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Okay, great. That's the that's the answer I wanted and I won't make any more. Well, I'll just say, the toolkit is a little computer based at this point. So um, so that's good. Here, it's that you're open to, um, good to hear that. Um. And then, I also have questions about, um, the parking that, uh, memory with Alister brought up. When you've looked at how the, I've basically the same fear that, that remember McAllister has that has reduced parking, people park on the street because I've done it. And then there's less room for trees, widening sidewalks, street trees, all the other things we might do to encourage. And bike lands to encourage others. When you travel. Um, so when you've looked at how this works, you mentioned a bunch of other cities. But, Many of them seem like San Francisco, San Jose, they seemed, um, you know, if I lived in an apartment in San Francisco without parking, I would not be parking on the street. There's no street parking. Um, so, have you really looked a lot at, at, comparable cities and by comparable? I don't, there are advanced places and you named Redwood City, I think. There are dense places in Redwood City and Mountain View, but actual places where there's a lot of street parking available. Yeah,

[00:28:10] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: so I don't know if Lori, you can pull up our very last slide and it's in your packet, but we did put together, um, a pure city examples that we looked at and we have on that was Sunnyvale, East Palo Alto, Redwood City. San Mateo County, San Jose, and what their trip production targets were, and how they are, um, in terms of their tedium, and that shows you kind of where we fall. Um, example would be for Sunnyvale um, for their offices. They are paying at a reduction of 65% of peak hour trips. So for ours, we have, uh, 50% reduction, so that gives you an, but that again, that's for offices, for the residential. They're targeting 30% and for our residential, we go between 20 to 40. So depending on the size. Um, East Palo Alto has a 40% reduction. Both residential and non-residential. So we did try and meet what other cities in our area aren't they?

[00:29:16] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: And how do you count for production because, Honestly, when I lived at Park Place down the street, 100% of the time, they gave me a parking place at 100% of the time I parked on the street, not knowing that. Um, Would that be counted, you, in this metric, you would be counting that as a per reduction. Because I didn't that, if it was unbundled parking, I would. The

[00:29:41] Transportation Planner Pacho: points of egress and ingress for development, we determine in time space where traffic monitoring would be, but since for residential projects, we're not requiring, um, you know, measuring actual trip reduction targets. What we're doing is we're requiring adoption of TDM at a sufficient level, which would then offset demand for parking where they need for parking. So in our analysis of looking at other peer cities, how they've managed parking. This is very much an evolving space. San Jose, it would probably be the 1st jurisdiction that handled both TDM and parking together, where they've eliminated parking minimum citywide and adopted in in the same action of adopting a TDM order. So, San Francisco took it differently if a project were to provide more parking than above what's normally provide or required in your code. They similarly require additional TDM measures, um, to be adopted. So it's in this similar vein that we require a sufficient level of TDM. And in alignment with parking reductions and and elimination department exemption. It's

[00:30:58] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: a touch on the counting for residential, our enforcement is based specifically on. In your approved TDM, you say you're going to do something, you have to do it. It's not based on the actual

[00:31:12] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: trip reduction target being met. So that's pretty much what I was saying. You could, you know, a place with a lot of neighborhood parking. You could get your TDM credit by cutting down on, on site parking, and people could just be parking in the neighborhood. It doesn't, it's not reducing the trips. But it's qualifying for that particular is what I...

[00:31:36] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: Only if you're using the housing element, additional bonus. So you're going for an additional, you've chosen either 5% more of reducing in your TDM, the plan to reduce it by an additional 5% than what's required, or you're choosing one additional cord and 2 on salary strategy. So in order to qualify to reduce the parking, you have to enact additional TDM measures. Above and beyond place for that, that size. Okay, if I have something. Yeah. Yeah,

[00:32:11] Chair Alison Hicks: so the idea behind residential is that, for example, along a large apartment, like, a residential, a, um, apartment owner, uh, would provide

[00:32:22] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: a bunch of TDM strategies that are available for the residents living in the apartment building, but they don't have the ability to force the residents to do certain things versus if you're a large scale office employer. Right, we would check on the enforcement because that office employer has more direct control over the trips that are going in and out of their, of their, um, Visits. But

[00:32:47] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: to qualify forward that parking reduction. Or, um, So if you're doing a large residential, you need 40% trip production in order to get that housing element incentive, you would have to go for 45% trip reduction or 40% with 2 editions. Sorry, and now you want to. Yeah, if

[00:33:10] Principal Planner Pancholi: I could just add a few more things. Diana Pontoli, principal planner for the planning division. Thank you for the question. I think the way I look at it is that, you know, this is one policy strategy that this is, um, bringing forward. There are other efforts that we are looking at, which will then have to, will act together, to see how parking involved on one site. Uh, a lot of other jurisdictions that we have looked at use the residential permit parking program as a key strategy to kind of, you know, manage the parking. Spill, making sure parking spillowars don't happen in the neighborhoods, which is a obvious concern we hear with a lot of developments in the city. The other part is that, you know, we will have to look at how our parking um related strategy in the TDM program is working out. All the recent residential developments that I have seen coming to council in the last 2 years. Uh, developers have said to us that parking is a key asset for our residents and that is, um, very key to the marketability of the project as well. Very few of them will come in with extremely reduced parking numbers. So, we're hoping, you know, it is going to be something that we'll be able to say, but right now, the developers have been telling us parking is really key for them to provide on site. Okay, I'll say

[00:34:40] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: the rest of it. Yeah, it sounds like something that. This is why it is the epigram. I'm growing monitoring. Um, And then I, we all got, email from, uh, various interested parties. Um, one of them was whether, uh, Whether parking, reductions, um, this from Yimmi, which, so you've probably seen the question. But their parking reductions could scale with the scale of the, of the, of the. Yeah,

[00:35:21] Transportation Planner Pacho: we are identifying next steps once the ordinance is adopted, how we would implement parking reductions, and we got a good comment from EBC, which recommended scaling parking reductions based on a certain level. So whether it's, you know, one to 10% or one to 50%. The amount of credit that would be given, determine how much parking they reduce from. Um, so that's something you need to further flesh off, but it's being considered. It

[00:35:48] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: might be something we can add to the toolkit as we collect more data.

[00:35:53] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Okay, and then. Um. Are, why, you had something on, uh, active, You'll know the phrase better than I will, active transportation gaps. Do those include, is there as a possible thing that a developer could provide, um, um, bridging those gaps? Um, are other similar things that would encourage, uh, walking like wider sidewalks and more tree canopy, are those also, are those considered gaps or how do you figure those? Because they certainly encourage walking. Are they a part of the toolkit?

[00:36:40] Transportation Planner Pacho: We would need to study how that would be operationalized in the toolkit, whether a certain number of trees, um, right, would qualify for, I mean, it's about essentially trip production. So to the extent that, you know, planting additional trees might achieve that. We need to study, but I think where it could potentially qualify as pedestrian oriented uses and amenities, you know, that are oriented to, you know, acting transportation. So to the extent that, you know, multimodal improvements, like by facilities and protection and green elements are considered to that extent might be, at least the nexus might be there to establish that, but we, we need to further understand how to begin the tool. But

[00:37:28] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: I said, developer where to come in and and has to do that as a measure.

[00:37:32] Transportation Planner Pacho: We would have that conversation. and ask them to provide why they think that that would be a trip reduction and have those conversations. So they can come in with their

[00:37:40] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: own strategies. And it sounds like there might be an intersection of the active transportation. Things that have been that.

[00:37:50] Transportation Planner Pacho: Potentially. Anyway, yes, the future also.

[00:37:56] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Okay, and um, Did I miss it? Micronobility, it's in there as part of the. Yeah, it must be. Right. So

[00:38:05] Transportation Planner Pacho: there's bike share membership and then also subsidies that could be provided by a developer, applicant, 2 tenants, um, residents and authorities for uh, bike share services. So if they wanted to provide them credits, eventually, once you do have micro really up and running, the ideas they would be able to use those credit sports, you know, a number of rides or, you know, does not pass those things like that.

[00:38:30] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: So for micro mobility, it could be.

[00:38:33] Transportation Planner Pacho: Correct. Like, share, share.

[00:38:36] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Okay, we don't have.

[00:38:38] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Okay, those are my questions. I'm I'm so sorry. I'm catching. Um, can we address the letter that we got from DNA?

[00:38:53] Chair Alison Hicks: Okay. So, um, It's difficult when we have a meeting at 6. Um, but just sure, we have not seen this.

[00:39:04] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Okay, yeah. So that's why I'm bringing it up.

[00:39:07] Chair Alison Hicks: Okay.

[00:39:07] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Because I was going back, saying that it was a couple other questions that, um, all headfest method. So there, the subject is PDM coordinates, EMA, participation, and implementation considerations. So, um, I think. There. I'm trying to find where there's an actual question versus just feedback. Um. If not required through the ordinance, how will consistency with these plans? I think they made that precise plans that were mentioned, you know, um, North Bay Shore, East Westman, San Antonio, be achieved, as one other questions. So I think uh, some of the comments that, prior to that question was, um, They use the words, uh, consider the legal constraint associated with mandating participation in private organization at the same time with the lack of participation requirements. So maybe if staff can share what the conversations were with the TMA leading up to the coming to CTC, um, apologies. I just thought was.

[00:40:31] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: Yeah, and I, Believe of, um, my fresh on the line, so, um, he can jump in. Yes,

[00:40:40] Unknown Speaker: thank you, Allison, and, uh, thank you for the question, Counselor, Robert Kame. I can shed some light on the legal, the constraints that the city has. So historically, the TMA has been funded through individual development agreements with developers who agree to contribute according to the size of their project into the TMA to run the Mountain View shuttle, for instance. However, turning that into a permanent ordinance for funding would require compliance with prop 218 and prop 26. And among the restrictions in both of those propositions, is that we would have to make findings for the amount of the levee to match the amount of the benefit received by parcel. In addition, we have constraints on providing funding to private organizations that we have to comply with through state law. So, keeping the exact same funding structure in place through a TDM ordinance would constitute an unlawful franchise agreement with the TMA, so to avoid that legal issue. It's currently voluntary in the TDM ordinance itself. However, I am working on a process to make it easier for organizations such as the TMA to create a property-based improvement district that could then fund the shuttle. Thank you.

[00:42:09] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: And I guess that goes back to the question I asked right before that is kind of what's the engagement been with the TMA?

[00:42:15] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Do they?

[00:42:18] Transportation Planner Pacho: No, that. They do. Okay, they are aware. I think there is, um, Different points of view.

[00:42:25] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Yes.

[00:42:26] Chair Alison Hicks: Okay. Okay. Okay. Um. And then, so the question I

[00:42:35] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: will just add, though, that this ordinance will not be retroactive. So anybody that has already has an active TDM will stay in their active TDM. Um, so, one

[00:42:48] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: of the questions was about consistency with some of the precise plan requirements of that kind of address.

[00:42:54] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Right, okay. Um, Okay, so I think their concern, it sounds like, is just participation.

[00:43:15] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Okay. But I think there was maybe, at least, um, in the council briefing that I have to stop, like an opportunity if people, wow, and maybe if council goes in that direction, and that might be a way to help address some of that. But

[00:43:32] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: again, it is a strategy. So they can choose, and there's a lot of benefits from the TMA, like the last mile shuttle, they can help with the reporting. They have, there's a lot they can help. Uh, developers in acting their TDM. So, we think that it still is a good option, especially for some of those developers that are just trying to figure out where to start. Thanks, thanks, sure. Okay, thank you. So now

[00:44:03] Chair Alison Hicks: we move on to, um, Members of the public. Uh, would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person like to provide comments on this item? So I would pick the Ray's hand button in Zoom or put for that card? And we'll take in-person speakers 1st and each person will have 2 minutes. Is there anyone? members of the public. In person. Okay, are there any members of the public virtually wish to speak? Yes. David Watson? Oh,

[00:44:41] David Watson: I'm David Watson. Uh, you, uh, may have seen that we, uh, uh, we sent a letter, uh, like, uh, James sent a letter. Um, I uh, wanted to start by uh, thanking uh, Chair Hicks for raising the parking reduction scaling question. I'm glad to hear that that can be addressed administratively. Two more things from our letter I wanted to mention. The limit parking supply credit shouldn't be contingent on adjacent street parking being metered or permanent. A developer does not control on streak parking policy. That's the city's job, and I'm sure you'll hear me back here, asking for on street, uh, metered or permitted parking, uh, because that's something that I think the city should absolutely be doing. Another is please open an enhanced TDM parking exemption pathway for projects under the 200 ADT threshold. They are, uh, correctly exempt from the ordinance, but um, that means that they are, they don't have the parking exemption available to them at all. They should be able to opt in. Also, the toolkit still has 7 course strategies marked as placeholders. It's without them, the residential math for the enhanced TDM tier doesn't quite work. It would be nice if that could be available before the council hearing. Thanks very much. Thank

[00:46:11] Chair Alison Hicks: you. Other 4 speakers. Ronnie Hatrick. Yeah,

[00:46:23] Roni Hattrup: hello, good evening. Transportation Committee members, Ronnie Hatrip with the Mountain View Transportation Management Association. Um, I apologize for the late receipt of the letter that we sent today. We had literally just convened our meeting of the membership and governance committee yesterday evening. So, we did our best to turn this letter around as fast as possible. And I think, really, what the purpose of the letter is is to really address the concerns that we have in terms of not requiring participation in the TMA. So, uh, RTMA works because it's coordinated broadly and supported broadly without including new and medium, um, Large commercial and large residential projects or developments. Um, efforts, risks become disjointed, responsibilities inconsistency applied, and overall outcomes diminished. And there are immediate consequences that we are concerned about. If membership growth is constrained, going forward, the TMA will likely need to reduce its services. Meaning fewer shuttles, reduce coverage, and less reliable service, pushing commuters and residents back into single occupancy vehicles, and increasing traffic congestion. Um, and then one of the considerations, I think you had noted there is that, uh, consideration should be giving for how new development will meet the precise plan requirements in North Bayshore and East Vismin and San Antonio where TMA participation is required and has been promoted through those programs or through those uh, those documents. So we just urge the transportation committee to establish a clear path, either through the ordinance or other mechanisms, um, as Matesh had stated, a P bed being a potential option in the future, to ensure robust participation by new development. And the timing of this is crucial. And I think that's one of the biggest concerns is we're just now exploring potential conversations of a pea bed. I have not bedded this conversation with our full board. So I did not address that in the letter. Um, but we know these processes do take time, and there's a likelihood that our services might be impacted even just next year, if our growth is uh, significantly impacted from a financial perspective. So, I appreciate your time and consideration. Thank you. Are

[00:48:35] Chair Alison Hicks: there more speakers? No, that's all. Okay, so now I'm bringing this item back to nitty members for their comments. Did

[00:48:50] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: any of you guys start doing? I don't care. Okay. Um. Thank you. Uh, can you remember copy? Well, um, thank, I am very excited that we are here at this point where we have a final recommendation. Um, that will be able to bring to our colleagues council. I feel like, um, I know that I was sharing with staff. I know it's been a long 2.5 for your journey, but, um, really excited to where we are now and, um, didn't have a lot of questions because I had my calls on the recent yesterday, I have a lot of them. Um, you know, I think one of the biggest things when looking at the ordinance is adopting it, but also allowing for that flexibility that we hear all the time, from our development community, about, you know, kind of the unpredictability of where, like our, I don't know, where we are. Um, and I thought it was really helpful. Thank you so much to staff who pulled together the TDF targets in the case study so they could share it with us. I thought it was like just really helpful to understand the context with which we're operating in. Um, You know, I think the city of San Jose, about, there's like, 3

[00:50:07] Chair Alison Hicks: years ago or something. Or, Yeah,

[00:50:10] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: like a while ago. So, um, it's nice to to know some of the other cities and what they've done in that in that time for us to think about. Um, I appreciate that we can adopt ordinance, but we can also, um, look back at how we're monitoring and enforcing. I thought that, uh, miscarriage, I brought up a lot of points, a good point, which is, We hear that parking is getting reduced, but we also hear from developers that they need to include it to make it, um, competitive and that's what, um, people want. So, I think, to me, it's really about, how we're able to do monitoring. And I think that's really the hardest part with the North Bay Shore, we're very fortunate where we're able to kind of have those 3 gateway points and you can like count it a lot easier, but as we're implementing our housing element, I think, and seeing development all across our city. We're not gonna, We're just gonna have to get on how to do that, but I think adopt, that doesn't mean we shouldn't adopt the TPM ordinance and the different, you know, uh, 4 strategies, auxiliary strategies, it just means that, it may need to come back to council and that's okay that we, that coordinance allows for that. So I think that's all good. Um, I really appreciate the thoughtfulness that staff took into, you know, patron driven uses, but really the what I call like neighborhood serving uses, we've been adopting like our economic vitality strategy. We've been focusing on that as we've been adopting. Um, our housing element and talking about activation in the different notes of our city. So really like that. We want to encourage, um, that to continue throughout our city and so those would be sad. that's part of the reality we're looking in. Um, and I would want, I understand, like, here with the TMA of saying. I think that the more incentives that we can provide, the more people will like voluntarily opt in instead of opt out. And I really like the evolution of where the ordinance have landed because I do think it feels, um, less heated and more, um, participatory. Um, so I think that that is unfortunate. Um, the thing that came up in my briefing that I want to like daylight for my other committee members. It would be really great is council adopted, our recipe, special update. And I think one of the other ways we can, um, When, The future council, um, looks at, uh, revising the master fee schedule, they can include, like, the implementation of the TDM coordinates, the stop time dedicated to that, um, to do cost recovery, and I think that would be efficient and effective. So I just want to drop that in right now for my colleague who will be here when that comes back. Uh, I think that's everything. Um, but I really, I'm thrilled and happy, and I can move the staff. Thanks. That's a Palest. So

[00:53:35] Committee Member John McAlister: I'm familiar with this from the 2013. So where you've been seeing it for 4 years. I think it's evolved from 2013 when we really had a lot of, uh, Jobs being created in our facial. We did have that show point at least, we're trying to produce the traffic on 85, all the others coming, yeah. And uh, It took some time to get going. So we flash forward to now, and we're, we're trying to get something going here. What I like about the plan is that the enforcement, I know it's a bad word. But it's a good one, because we need to, to make this. plan work, we need to be able to enforce it, and that's one thing that we never were able really to do with our other TMA. But we did get a lot of shuttles going through. One thing that we should be looking for is when I was looking at this to be successful. And the patrons driving, it's not going out the driveway. So that's except. Where are they, they're going to get these TMs to take them to. They're pretty much to their job sites, they're out, because otherwise everything else is exempt, so. If North Bayshore is reducing jobs, we're increasing the housing. Uh, gonna be interesting to see how they can get the traffic reduction. If, The jobs are, you know, let's say they're moving to San Jose. So I drive to San Jose, how is that going to affect mountains? Drip production. So, uh, And a lot of this is contingent from my perspective, doing this for a while, is the shuttle services and the bus services. have to be a main component for getting people out of cars and we're not there. Um, and if the current situation is, we're not going to be in there in a long time. No offense to ETA, they're, they're having some issues and a lot of that stuff is going along. So, uh, just again, what I emphasize is we have to work with, TMA on their shuttles in town. We got to work with BTA in their shuttles. Caltrain, BT, light rail. Uh, That's a light rail is a whole different story. It's part of the solution. That's my comments, I was. Okay well.

[00:56:00] Chair Alison Hicks: Luckily for me, his chair, the last year, said almost everything I've written in my notes. Um, yeah, I'm excited about this too. I think that, you know, it's a fascinating subject. We're all, we are also facing as Joe McAllister started to say, really changing times, who knows where jobs are going, and also how, you know, automated vehicles might interface with this. Will they do personal last milestock? Or will they kill our mass transit? Or

[00:56:30] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: will they do something else entirely? Um,

[00:56:32] Chair Alison Hicks: you know, those, that's so, principally, one of the big things I like is that this is evergreen, given that there's a time of change. Um, and, I also, uh, thought, well, I think the history of it is very like traditional commute relief congestion, and then it seems like the, uh, you know, reduce your carbon footprint was added, and things have been added, rightfully added, and over over time. But I think because of its commute origins, it's very commute oriented. And as German, you know, as member McAllister said, um, Yeah, we are becoming like the growing element in town is housing. So, and it has all sorts of other restrictions on how we can use this. So this is, So we're really going to have to monitor this. I don't you know, through nobody's fault. Various tools may or may not work the way we originally intended, so I really want to be open to that, but this is kind of a pilot. Um, let's see, I really like that the EPC. I think it was the ABC put in what they call patron driven uses. I think that's a way of making this more as, as, uh, a way. It's a neighborhood, so you can also call them neighborhood serving uses. And I've heard 70% of trips are,

[00:58:05] Unknown Speaker: um, not commute. I

[00:58:07] Chair Alison Hicks: don't know if that's true. I just read it a webinet. But anyway, a lot of them are, and they are for the kinds of these kinds of uses, whether it's childcare or, um, you know, groceries, drugs, et cetera. I really want to see more of that and I also want to see more focus on, I think, for this plan, we look at math transit as we should. And we look at bike lanes and bike uses, but not so much of walking. In walking, in cities that I've seen that produce SOB use walking is a big part of it. So we really, so I think we need to interface with the ATP studies I did when I was a planner at Oakland. I will not give you a book, but I was asked to see how far people were willing to walk from the office to a parking garage and read tons of studies. And the answer is, It depends. The answer is, it depends on what's between the office and the parking garage and there are all sorts of elements that I want, you know, tell you about, but one of them is, like, do people enjoy the book? Because they will purposely park far away. and get in their daily steps.

[00:59:17] Chair Alison Hicks: So I really think we cannot discount that and make, you know, make our city into, How do I say, a horrible place to walk and then expect people to walk. Um, people who walk, it doesn't have to be a parking garage for Don. How far will they walk? A little farther if they enjoy it than if they hate the wall. Um. So I want to, in the future, I want more on, bring infrastructure, I want more on, call them patron driven uses. Um, I, Agree with what our Yimbi letter said about not running metering everywhere, that regulation. You know, the whatever's called RPP program is often enough. I agree with member McAllister that we have to pair this with mass transit and see that as a changing thing, something we can interact with to make it work better for us, maybe. Um, And uh, And, um, And when we say safer it's to school, I always want the word scooter in there, because I think most grade school children scoot, not just role, because what that means besides us. And, uh, and, um, think. I like membership, uh, being voluntary, and I think that, is, all of my, that's all my notes. Oh my gosh. Oh,

[01:01:01] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: sure. When does their present part? I don't know about cancer,

[01:01:10] Unknown Speaker: but we can find out. Okay.

[01:01:18] Chair Alison Hicks: Okay, so without any last thoughts? Do we have some, did somebody make emotions? Okay, and you 2nd it? Okay, all those in favor. Passes you now. Thank you so much. Thank you.

[01:01:38] Unknown Speaker: I

[01:01:38] Committee Member John McAlister: was glad. It's very cool.

[01:01:44] Assistant Public Works Director Boyer: It's like, I was mustachi. Be careful, baby. I love that.

[01:01:55] Chair Alison Hicks: Placeholders will be updated with the council comes out. Okay, you're saying. Yeah, well, they comment on the place. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay.

[01:02:05] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Like in the tool, in the tool, yeah. accelerated. Sorry, there you go.

[01:02:11] Chair Alison Hicks: Okay, thank you. Appreciate it. Appreciate you And set up. Yes. Okay. Have Tanya ready? Like Yeah, I'm gonna say, we're gonna, well, uh, our staff is setting up, we're going to take a 5 minute break and we'll be back at 7. Okay.

[01:03:58] Unknown Speaker: You said pretty much.

5.2 Middlefield Road Complete Streets, Project 22-01

[01:08:06] Chair Alison Hicks: 708. No. We are now moving on to, I'm going to start the meeting again, moving on to item 5.2, which is the middle field road, complete streets, project 22 dash 01. The staff presentation will be provided by Poland Union.

[01:08:26] Associate Civil Engineer Nguyen: I hope I can upset. Pretty well. Probably later, associate civil engineer. So, yeah. We could be in community members, but at least... As I said, support engineer with seabo infrastructure. Be with me tonight is Robert Gonzalez, principal engineer, and Adam. Uh, from CFP engineering, and I will be joining, uh, remotely. Uh, we're here today to present the 2nd set for middle field of the street. Project location is on middle field. Between. More effect, a bathroom. As I like, I like it in the red dots line. You know, feel overpassed, Stephen Greeks. Well, and Calpress, they will identify between more and easy street. Of course, BJ library, you know, listen, lock up. And under cost companies they were up to 37 near Bernardo. How improvements were submitted up to go back when application I saw on the left. Including roadway resurfacing from office, the Wisman, plus 4 protected byways, between mob and banana. But to violence off, it'll be almost there. That's where the bicycle, 2 months, at 4 intersection, more bad, all of our, easy, cereola, and good months, bro. Because the city received new grants for me to feel, which will be discussed in next line. News go would add it to the project I saw on the right. So... Drug was reserving entire corridor. New benefit and hyper signal at that. Get your and bicycle improvements. Or all intersection along the corner. So this slide, so the timeline, this project has taken so far. In June 2022. Be back was presented the complete checklist for the or back week when vacation. In January, 2023. The city was awarded $2.48. To the back 3 grand. Stop went to the council in February 2023 to secure the red. In May 2024. See, the council authorized, person of subsidy agreement will see free. For disasters it. And the person's support. Desire will take up in 2024. See, they received 2 additional credit for me to build. The 1st one is the housing send it. Um, received in June 2025. In the amount $one,6000000 And then in December 2025. State was awarded $5.170000 to the affordable houses and ability benefits program. Your back is a federal grant. That comes with certain requirements, including. Or donation with California Department of Transportation, compress. Which is also the obed administering authority. Did they commit to deliver the projects go indicated in the benefication within the grand funding timeline. Fund, funding must be obligated by January 2017. At least no funds receive them, the housing incentive poor, and the affordable houses, then ability communities, right? Will have the city funded is not school. It is important. To decipate to invest in middle field because it tastes one of those things, in no point of. Um We want to highlight that middle field is what, the only is what, regional corridor, in the city network. To directly connect the adjacency place of Sunnyvale and Colorado. Visa 0 accent plan and local septive plan identifying the field as part of the high local high injury network. Accent MB, comprehensive model plan, identify me the field. Uh, a high stress facility, with bicycle. Level of traffic stress, 3 out of 4 and until 2 priority for transportation improvement project. Proposing class for separate ways. Proposed improvements on middle field, a part of the draft, active transportation plan. So the map, show major corridor in the speaking orange. Corridors that have recently received, or are planned to receive, rode dials are highlighted in green. That's also, Invent the game. In the mountains, a rhod diet, a middle field. But does US have considered a lot that includes. Broadway classification. Overall, Broadway network. Average daily trips, 70, emergency response, transit access, and operational impacts. In March 2025. They'd be packed provided comments on the Moffat Commistry project. Requesting consideration of a road diet. Therefore, stop evaluating the middle flowing door. Oh, potential water from 2 length to waterland situation. And would like to share a summary of the results. The scenarios analyze world, different conditions. Background conditions and cumulated conditions. The criteria used to evaluate the scenarios are Broadway capacity, level of service, human analysis. Hourly traffic ballers were evaluated against broadway hourly capacity. So identify work with has been efficiency. Which block diet? We know people would experience of a capacity condition as indicated in the table. The left collar. So, corridor, Divide it into 3 segments. The 1st segment is between Morphin and Christmas. Um, so with, in, in, in, implementing the rock diet, the 2nd would appearance of work as they bought one hour during evening peak hours, Under exit and back recognition. Do our during more than 8 hours, and during even hours under accumulating conditions. The top row, show, roadway capacity on the segment between one, one and 237, and the last rows, show, the roadway, as the, on the remaining segment, which you do to the, 237, and is the, the limit. Level observers is a leather base, graded income, measuring the operating condition of an intersection, with a representing best free flow conditions, and representing what jet conditions. I saw on the map, with broad diet implemented. By interception circle, it will appearance. A degrade level of service to eat or F. Levels level of servant analysis. They are still a common practice for operational analysis of local intersection. Vehicle, miles, bravo, has been broke up. However, it is used more in a quadratic analysis complex. human analysis, evaluates, vehicles stuck in, on that section. The rod diet would cause substantial key would be, see, therefore, an interception along the border. And to resolve, BQ and deficiency, exit the letter length would need to be length. So in this slide as one example. Uh, I can show how much the left and land is to be limited. And in more, and in the section. If implementing the wrong diet. On the eastbound direction. The letter leg would need to be extended 200 feet. Which would require median reconstruction and remove approximately degrees. On the west bound. The left and left would need to be expanded 400 feet and it is not feasible. Due to that change in rowage geometry. This is no location or no corridor in blue, at Ellis Street, Uzman, Block avenue, and Stay route to 37. Not, not about seven. Uh, in summary, the study concluded, uh, would result in deficiency of the intersection's level of service. Increased intersection vehicle queue in, and reviews, point of capacity. Additionally, implementing the road that would cause the loss of capacity. Which will impact the operation of all the is wet materials, and emergency response time for medical, police and fire services. For these reasons, staff does not recommend implementing around that for me to feel. Oh, but the net slice. No, but we walk you through statement by statement show and get upon, and cross section along the portals. Thank you. So

[01:20:13] Unknown Speaker: the existing order, indigence can be spoiled into 2 to state, segments, segment A, from Love it, to Wisman, and segment B, from what's going to Bernard. Segment A, excluding the segment over State Route 85 comprises mostly multifamily homes. 2 travel lanes in each direction, class 2 bike lanes on both sides. Which becomes parking lanes on weekends and after 7 p.m. on weekdays. Feedback received we had received from the BPAC last week. Uh, included advancing the parking lot, now, or soon as possible, rather than waiting for the design approval. This would require consideration from the council. We'll talk about more about feedback session. Uh, to implement a full-time platform bike facility on the street parking will need to guru mode at all times. In addition to vertical elements, green bike lane striping on the right, on the right there will be added to conflict zones, such as driveways and bus stops. Within the segment, the state route 85 overpass is approximately 1000 feet long, it's shot here on the right, and spans across state route 85. There is a center medium, 2 travel lanes, and a class 2 bike lane in each direction. No sidewalk on the southbound side. Staff evaluated closing the sidewalk apple along the south side. On the bridge, over, stink rattle, or 85, including the feasibility of converting the existing bike plane to a shared multi-use path for eastbound bicyclist and pedestrians. Staff met with California department of transportation, Caltrans, which owns the bridge, Caltrans, staff, confirmed alterations to the overpass, including not limited to modifying the media. And adjusting language, will require a comprehensive review and process. Which would cause the project to miss theobactory funding, right, deadlines. Therefore, staff will pursue designing design of a multi-purpose path as a separate project. This separate project will be proposed for additional design, construction funding, uh, in the next display year. For the current project, the proposed layout of the bridge overlass will be somewhere today's system condition, as shown. The top diagram here is the existing condition, and the one otherwise is the proposed section. So the next segment, segment B is the Wisman Road to Bernardo. This segment comprises mostly commercial buildings. 2 travel lane, and a full-time class 2 bike lane, direction. Left turn lanes and center landscaping median. This segment process, the BTA light rail near Logue Avenue, and runs underneath State Route 237 with on-Ramp and off-Ramp entrances. A new crosswalk at the BTA light rail, crossing to connect to the existing multi-use path was considered as a project element. This project will require CPUC approval and BTA coordination due to the proximity of BTA trials. In this context, it will be addressed as. Similar to segment, improvements include class 4 bike facilities with buffers and vertical delineators, to provide separate separation between bike lanes and travel. In addition to vertical elements, green bike lanes driving will be added at conflict zones, such as driveways and bus stops. Typical intersection improvements. Include high visibility crossbox. Advanced stock bars. Accessible pedestrian signals, ADA compliant fur brand upgrades. And I know your, the directional programs design will be evaluable. value when you're feasible. The, uh, the diagram we show here shows, um, ADA car bramps that can point it to the middle of the intersection. Design standard is to provide directional car brands more practical and feasible. Oh, stop it. Oh,

[01:24:48] Unknown Speaker: I like green striking. Thank you. Thank you very much. Um.

[01:24:54] Associate Civil Engineer Nguyen: Stop share, the Caseppi die. Probably good for you. Last week, April 29, and we see the following recommendations. 1st one. Remove Hopkins. And convert it, exit in up time by length, to full time ahead of, product design completion. Um. Really feasible. But it will require formal noticing incidents, council approval. Considering. Available staffing. In both transportation plan and speed maintenance. Delivery will be toward the 2000 practicing. 2nd one, 2nd feedback. Uh, is in the mountain, well, diet, or middle field. Uh, it's not recommended by the, the robust study. Also, implementing water would require the project redesign. It would cause the city to miss your battery for funding application deadline up, January 2027, and potentially, and we will lose the bread. The 3rd one he considered, including protect the intersection design. Middle field is a bit a route. And in the set with truck grounds, including more. That will be quite wider. That will be quite wider. Protect the intersection is not recommended. You do don't need to. By this, no right way. And reconstruct the intersection. Which will have special impact on the project class schedule. The next that is to close the cyber gap on the south side of the stable identifiable pass. Not feasible to be included as out of this project. Due to. The extensive carpets, committing, review, uh, photo process. However, It would be evaluated by a future project. Which will be proposed for funding in the next fiscal year. And last. And that is considered 10. All 10 have foot wide. Vehicle. 10 or 10 have put wide length and not the standards. The city follows nectar recommendation. With 11 foot. Plan. Based on the type of broadway video, please, a transit corridor. The staff will incorporate, be back and feedback, and proceed with the design. See free. We will assist with initiating the desired coordination with carpets. Subject to cultures approval. We anticipate the desired condition by end of 2026. And with construction in some of the 2027. Okay.

[01:28:28] Chair Alison Hicks: Yeah, right. That's the entire presentation, I assume. So uh, now it's time for committee member question. Okay. Um, so

[01:28:46] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: I had a question about. When we moved from class to by place to class. Do we see? Or do they tend to be the same for doing that one?

[01:29:06] Unknown Speaker: This is usually situation by situation. So, um, if the corridor stays the same, we're not changing anything, if you're taking lane width away from, uh, travel lane to exist an existing travel lane. 14 feet. It's like very generous. You will see a lot of speeding in those lights. So if you take that and put 3 or 4 feet into a buffer. You've got the last 4 bike lane. You've got a buffer and you've got a narrower driving. So in those in those situations, the driver feels like they have a little bit more illustration. So the natural tendency is to slow down. I think one.

[01:29:47] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Sometimes when the topic of the road. Oh, good. This... Um, but I was just looking, looking over the staff report. It seems like the, you know, another issue in addition to the funding is just like the volumes, which we're seeing people use their vehicles a lot, I don't feel that I agree that correctly. I don't like we have. Literally, almost 2000 vehicles. Yeah, that's that's correct. Yes. Right. Okay. And if we went to the road tie, it would go down, if we had it in half, that would, I just want to make sure I read everything.

[01:30:26] Unknown Speaker: Yeah, the capacity of the road would go down. Okay. Um,

[01:30:31] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: and right now to be, I'm so sorry I didn't think of these questions prior. So how many feet is the middle field now, like the 2 2 length. A little width of the July. Because it, because if we... Reduce with the software. I was just wondering

[01:30:48] Unknown Speaker: if that's going to do math for us and figure out if you can squeeze it. That's

[01:30:53] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: why I leave it to professional. Uh, but I, That was just one of the things.

[01:30:59] Unknown Speaker: Yeah, so it's segment B showed the existing 2 travel aids on the top. So, um, the widths vary, but it's about, uh, 11 and 11, so it's about 22 feet. Oh, on, on the, one direction and then, yes, each lane. Excuse me, 22 feet total, 11, 11, and then 12 and 11 in the other directions. So if you do a little bit of map on the bottom, we propose, giving some of that to a buffer area, about 3 feet, and then, um, the existing bike lane going from about 8 feet down to about 6 feet. So, taking some of the area from the bike lane and putting it into the buffer. Each of the lanes would be reduced down to the city standard. Um, Okay. Uh,

[01:31:48] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: another question. So, think. We council had to look at this project originally as like one project. But as a result, it sounds like there may be 3 projects coming out of it, which is this project, which you can use the funding, the segment over 85 and then the, basically, the VTA, CPUC part. And we, TBT on, um, when those 2 new projects segments would be determined, that would come back to counsel as part of the CAT yours. Or

[01:32:23] Assistant Public Works Director Arango: as a mid-year, oh. Hi. Hi, good evening, Edarango, is a co-worker director. Um, thank you very much. Um, so as far as timing, um, I can give you approximate timing based on, um, we're expecting to do. So, um, we're hoping to do a bit here for the, we understand the importance. providing another max 6 point on this. Um, so we're looking to get this through design, which is we expect to be done at the end of this year. And county council at that time for a new meteor capital project. To fund, um, to get funded, and then we can proceed with that. And then as far as the, um, Yeah, the crossing at the flight rail tracks, we had discussed, you know, timing, um, but we evaluate that as part of, uh, project or separate projects. We need to, we come back to you. Okay,

[01:33:25] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: great. Thank you. Um. Okay. Um. Oh, I had other questions, now they're like, yeah, go back. Yeah, yeah, yeah. No, no, no, re-trigger my mind. Yeah, because I started thinking about it. So

[01:33:47] Committee Member John McAlister: I submitted a few questions. I, I appreciates everybody's patience. A lot of you have been looking at you since 2022, so I'm coming in with this with fresh eyes and not hearing a lot of the background. So, when I asked a lot of questions, you just gave me some background information to get a sense of what's going. And so every time I look at my clients, I always ask, what, what's, And I listened to EPC, and I didn't hear one person ask about how many people are asking about. Why do I think? Beep. I pit. Where he asked about the people who are riding on land. And they came back with some information from 2018. Has there been any, uh, data collected or counting traffic counts since 2018? For bike riders on this fruits?

[01:34:42] Associate Civil Engineer Nguyen: Not by knowledge. So, the transportation planning is actually responsible for the transportation, evaluation, parts of this, projects that are identified as priorities, come out of planning studies, like mission zero, and, and in the future, active transportation plan. Those projects are identified as priorities and then they're both. So as part of those studies, they identified this, I think, the high priority, uh, collision network. High injury network was identified, as well as the performance of the, of the world in terms of strats. So, yeah,

[01:35:22] Committee Member John McAlister: my next question. You answered it. Ridership is not a criteria. These other items are criteria. Um, And I asked another question that was, These answers are great, and I appreciate your staff. Whoever did it. They were, hopefully, they were straightforward questions that somebody could bang about, so. Short time you guys did it. I appreciate. Oh, your whole department is still interesting. Really nice. Uh, I had another question, says, scope of the, oh, bag, 3 granite, and I asked. Uh, one of the questions was, was the upgrade on black lease class requirements? And the response was, the upgrade, so I, was included. They didn't really answer the questions. Was there an option or is that part of the criteria, but other things that?

[01:36:24] Associate Civil Engineer Nguyen: So we proposed last 4 as part of our application, and the obey criteria scores, the applications based on, uh, the element, the project elements and the benefits to that. So they saw the class 4s and they gave it a score. That's how we were awarded. Um... No,

[01:36:49] Committee Member John McAlister: you guys answered that. I mean, I have some comments going forward, but. Well, let me ask you this. They're easy. There wasn't a response. You sent out 1700 postcards. And I asked what was the expected turnout? I know so there was 20 responses and 8 people. In person. So, uh, 1700, we got 28. That's, I

[01:37:14] Associate Civil Engineer Nguyen: couldn't get you an answer. Oh, okay, I know. I don't think a good answer now in terms of return. So if I was a surveyor, you know, upholster, I would have that. I was just, um, I'll bring that up in comments. Um, Uh, Oh,

[01:37:34] Committee Member John McAlister: okay, there's another thing. So, I know, that's it. You did a good job.

[01:37:42] Chair Alison Hicks: A lot of questions. Very good answers. Good questions. That trigger your question? No, okay. Well, I'll have reread. I'll ask if you unsafe. So can you tell me a little more because many members of the book? I'm going to ask mostly questions that I'm actually felt like fast, right? Um, So I see you reducing lanes from, uh, 11.5 to 12 to 11 feet. And then people have said that also, sometimes 10 feet, is that if you still, people claim it's been used on El Camino real, I have not double checked to see if they're. They're right. Um, and then, I think in the presentation you just gave, you said, we're not doing that because a corridor of this type, we don't go down lower than 11. But it also, later in the, it says, we'll review that during the design standard review. So can you just give me a little more information on when you go down to 10. I like that you comment. But I like that you're steadily adding them to the buffer and maybe someday. They go down further, the buffer will become something else, but, um, but yeah, can you tell me a little more about either, what you think about 10 feet in various places and why you choose.

[01:39:04] Associate Civil Engineer Nguyen: So let's start let's start with El Camino. So that's a major corridor, lots of, lots of different types of traffic. Um, and my understanding from uh, from the Caltrans design was, it was designed for most of the core, one level of lane, and a 10 and a half of lane. So 11 foot lanes closest to the curb. That's where all the buses are. 10.5 foot is right next to it. On pinch points, there probably are areas that might, that 10.5 might have had to go lower. But that's how it was designed. So the feedback that we've got from our traffic team is that that could be very, very challenging. on, basically, a box truck. You may not, I'm not. Well, in terms of feedback. The

[01:39:47] Associate Civil Engineer Nguyen: 10.5 were laid on El Camino now, can't be a challenge when you have a box truck next to the, um, next to the bus. It feels like a very, uh, very tight horrible. Most people navigate it. I know if there's been enough to get uptick in palitions, but that's been the feedback. So, the feedback from that is we want the city standard to be 11. Um, the 2nd half of your question regarding the design standard is that that is a CIP project that everyone like council is very enthusiastic about or that last month. So as part of that, we'll be looking at. and codifying the width of the streets based on type of streets of arterials, corridors, um, residential areas with a lot of transit will get different lane treatments.

[01:40:36] Chair Alison Hicks: Okay, thank you. I have a much better understanding now. There's, it is, that way it points on alchemy, you know, there may be problems you're evaluating and. Okay. Um, and then, uh, so, PPAC said, could you advance? Could you do the parking removal ahead of the project is the answer. Is the answer yes to that or maybe? So

[01:41:07] Associate Civil Engineer Nguyen: the answer is yes, I think we put a couple caveats there because our transportation fination is reduced to that. Um, our street may not be... Backlog, if you do more than that. But we kind of put that in terms of like, yes, we can do it, but the expectations would be will be immediate.

[01:41:27] Chair Alison Hicks: Yes, according to your staff department. got married. All

[01:41:32] Assistant Public Works Director Arango: right, um, again, at Orango. Um, I just want to reinforce what, um, as I mentioned. It really is staff resources. Um, we have a lot of projects, we're trying to get through the, the efforts. We're very diligent. We're being very aggressive in our project delivery process. Um, and this effort requires us to notify all the residents, make sure that there's adequate time, and then there's an ordinance that does need to get us in contact for this as well, to officially revoke the, um, party. Um, we're supportive of it because, of course, it's very in line with the project. It just requires staff resources towards the end of this calendar here. Thank you.

[01:42:13] Chair Alison Hicks: So, things fall, but it comes on staff. And, uh, then I'm going to ask a couple questions that, bunch of members of the public wrote a group letter, and I'm going to ask some questions from there. Um, One question they asked was, um, Can you evaluate a middle fee? I got these. I'm just understanding them now. Maybe you've read them. Can you evaluate a middle field road diet as part of the current reservicing project?

[01:42:52] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: That seems, that's the question, just like, sure, how do, how does the city approach? Looking at everything. That might be helpful. Okay. Can that okay? Yeah. I love questions that piggyback. Well, and it's not just, I think it's just not as the middle field, but if like we were to like look at another patient. I just want to understand that process.

[01:43:15] Associate Civil Engineer Nguyen: Yeah, so there's a, there's a, there's a help of things that happen, but during the planning process, during the SSMB or the active transportation plan, um, or other areas, uh, other uh, planning projects, uh, planning exercises, such as that. They will look at the quarter use. They will look at the physical constraints of the quarter, the curb and curb with, and they'll look at current, uh, uses. We'll see where the bike, uh, chemistry and activity is now. Um, and then they'll recommend corridors for evaluation. So they kind of look at the demand side first. And then from there, the next trigger is really a traffic demand study, to really evaluate what type of, how it's used now in terms of capacity. So, uh, we've done that now with, I think the example where is in front of us with Middlefield is a really good one is. It has a look at the road capacity, hewing impacts, and the... level of service. Thank you for the for the different intersections. So that's typically what we'll do is we'll bring on a traffic consultant to evaluate those, you know, modeling results. After we've identified a order that's a good candidate for, at least looking at it, road items. So going back to your question, can can we do an evaluation of a run diet for middle field? Is that the question? Yeah, so

[01:44:51] Chair Alison Hicks: I'm not sure. Yeah, the answer is yes. The

[01:44:54] Associate Civil Engineer Nguyen: answer is yes, the answer is here we are. So if there's other, like, if there's questions specific to the to the study, I'm happy to answer.

[01:45:03] Chair Alison Hicks: Yeah, I thought that these were. Let's see. Um, These seem to be more comments on things. So, if they are, more questions than, um, Where, you know, if you can turn again questions. Later. Um, okay. So those are my questions? Are there any other questions that are triggered? Okay, then we will move on now to public comment on this item. Uh, if you are here in person to make a comment. Please, uh, on the lecture, please, uh, online. Yeah Right. Hi,

[01:45:57] Valerie Fenwick: I'm Valerie FedEx, I am a member of the performing arts committee. I am not speaking for that committee. I'm not speaking for my employer either. Former member of BPAC. Um, nice familiar faces here. Um, I, I, bike, walk, commute, and drive on this corridor. Uh, lots of cyclists that, that right now the part-time parking is a real problem because particularly as it gets dark. Um, it, in particular, it gets dark, people just start parking there in the winter, makes it very dangerous, particularly in the rain, incredibly dangerous. It's a regular part of my, when I am able to mute my bicycle, typically able, that is part of my regular commute. Um, I heard that one segment is at would be at capacity with a road diet. Why wasn't that considered? Uh, chewing, could that be handled with signal changes? What other things can we do that maybe isn't a full road diet of removing a lane, but instead making the lanes narrower where it is safe to do so? Um, I live on one mountain view's famous, narrow streets, fire engines still get down there, trucks, uh, we have a big giant pit that's a separate topic where somebody's dug out their entire plot up their house, but, uh, they got the land movers in, no problem. Um, I noticed level of service presented here was only for cars. My bike, I ride. I drive this segment. Almost every day. I walk on this area. I also bike, ride, and walk on California Avenue, and love the road diet on there. Love it. The residents are starting to really love that as well. Um, there's a lot of residents here. Highway 85 overpass. People are using both sides of that bridge. Uh, you can see the dirt, um, where there's no grass growing because people walk there. Um, it is also near the dollar store there uh, in that segment, which is a very popular shop for a lot of families where they get out there. is the local store. Um, but I would also like to urge the CTC. Thank you for serving here today, but also to consider a reduced speed limit, more urgently, and removing that part-time parking. Palo Alto has reduced your speed limit on middle field to 25 miles per hour. I drive that uh, several times a week, and it used, and I, my bike on it, used to be people went 45, 50 miles per hour. Now they go 30, 35. So, you know, it's not 25, but it is slower and they first. Thank you.

[01:48:25] Unknown Speaker: Um, so you mentioned, That would be, that, Adelfield would be at capacity or really congested if we're a diet we're being implemented. Would that, like,

[01:48:35] Chair Alison Hicks: if there was congestion, would people, that bike or would they cut other roads or how would that work? Yeah,

[01:48:46] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: yeah. Interesting.

[01:48:54] Greg Coladonato: Hello, my name is Hello Committee, Castle Transit Committee. My name's Greg Colin. My house is at the corner of Leslie Court and Middlefield. I've lived on the corridor for 16 years. One of my bedroom windows looks at Middlefield, and the other one has glorious view of the Dollar Tree. Okay, as we saw in Mr. Nguyen, 6 slide. Uh, it's strange but true, but Middlefield is the only way you can get from one side of Mount View to the other east to west on one road. None of the other roads go through. That in itself, to me, the reason to upgrade this bike path, this bike length from class 2 to class 4 so that you can get through the city on a road. I am a cyclist myself and I often use middle field. I like to address Mr. I'm many member McAllister's concerns. The traffic count on this road is not very high, but that's because biking and that bike lane sucks. So, like, you can't just use the count, say no one uses it. Because it's dangerous. To use this line, because there's always cars parked in it, and always people popping out of driveways. So you're not gonna know the actual natural traffic level and that bike lane until normal people feel safe biking in. So, I mean, I get that the, and by the way, you should count more than every 8 years. So like, if the last count was 2018, we should update that. For sure. Uh, but I think that you'll see a lot more traffic in this lane when it's safe to be in. Um, there's, I think that you should probably, uh, go to full-time bike lanes. When you can, staff, resources permitting. I also think that a road diet would be good, although it doesn't seem consistent with the fund, the deadlines for this project. So maybe later, do a road diet because there are a lot of drag racers on middle field. And I, uh, I know this, because they comes right in my window when I'm sleeping. Okay. I'd also like to point out that if the bus lanes, if the buses park in the bike lane, that makes this lane a lot less appealing. You have to go around a bus lane, around a bus. Which is not safe. Maybe put the bus stops on the right hike. Thank you.

[01:51:04] Chair Alison Hicks: Are there more in person? See? I'll go to. Bruce England. Thank you.

[01:51:21] Bruce England: I just want to mention really quickly that the, um, audio is pretty poor, particularly for Ellen, and also for Alison might be your distance from the microphone for the system, but kind of hard to hear everything you're saying. Um, okay, see what I can get into this amount of time. April Webster's letter is key to the things that we've been talking about out here. And so I won't repeat what show what she said. There's a lot in there to consider. Um, but the, the ATP where we've got a transportation plan should be uh, play into this project as much as possible is one comment. Uh, we hear VMT and levels of service, but we are interested in seeing VMT emphasized for application to this project and any project like this, really. Um, Multi mode is the direction for active transportation, and all of our projects in the city should reflect that. Um, the most important comment from me that you might not hear from anybody else tonight is about the abrupt curb at the north end of the path between Wisbon Station, going past Pyramid Park and middle field. The east west projects will expand the amount of connectivity from those using the path today, including to access the park and the adjacent light rail stations. So Google was going to fix that. They had plans for it, so the city could, I believe, just leverage what Google's already put together in order to make that happen. Um, really quickly with the time I have left, lane with reductions and green complete streets are important. All of the BPAC input from their meeting, including community comment, very important, very detailed. And hope that you will take that into account as much as you can. Um, What jumps out to me is that the definition of the project probably should have been fleshed out earlier because we're seeing the limitations and um, uh, risks of compromising the funding and we don't want that to happen. Um, And then, no, I think I'm out of time. Okay, thanks.

[01:53:23] Chair Alison Hicks: Thank you. Are there more virtual speakers? Uh, Sylvia Paymer. Hi,

[01:53:36] Silja Paymer: um, I also 2nd everything in um, April's letter from, um, that included green spaces. Um, uh, sorry, Celia Pamer, Resident Mountain View, member of green spaces. Um, I also just wanted to add on a few things I noticed during the meeting. Um, today, I was sort of surprised to hear that there was somehow a road diet would make it necessary to increase pavement space. Seems like if we're going to a road diet, one of the lanes could become a left hand turn lane as necessary. Um, and then, um, I do want to hear more about the timeline and if it's possible to get an extension so that we can get better results, um, because, you know, we don't do these very often and we're putting a lot of money into it. And so it should be what we want. I don't want to delay, obviously. Um, but if it's something that we can maintain the majority of the timeline and get, you know, 100% better results. That would be great. Um, I sorry, I lost my notes. Um, I do want to say, like, I would like to see some more kind of quick build options so that we could get stuff in, and then, um, maybe if the geometry is not quite right, it could be adjusted. Um, I do see on El Camino that we've seen the traffic slow down and the buses do still fit. Um, and so it would be nice to either narrow streets or if we went to a road diet, then we wouldn't need to narrow the lane and everyone would still fit. So that seems like a good option. Um, I do think it's ironic that we spent the 1st half of this meeting. talking about how we would encourage private developers, to encourage mode shift, and then now we're not following suit. So I do think we should kind of do what we preach and look for that mode shift and try to reduce vehicle miles traveled and increase our active transportation. Thank you. Thank you.

[01:55:42] Executive Assistant Laura Lo: There, wash speakers. Mary, Daniel.

[01:55:57] Mary Dateo: Large section of. We'll have protected bikes. And parking be removed. We were just reminded.

[01:56:08] Chair Alison Hicks: Bear your voice spotty. Maybe you can start over again. Can you start her in 2 minutes? Okay, start it over again now and see if we can hear you.

[01:56:27] Mary Dateo: Yes. Bye. Can you hear now? I'll try again.

[01:56:32] Chair Alison Hicks: Your voice is a little spotty, but maybe we'll bear with it. Uh Hmm Mary, are you there?

[01:56:49] Mary Dateo: Yes.

[01:56:51] Chair Alison Hicks: Okay, can you start?

[01:56:58] Mary Dateo: Oh, I changed my microphone. I change my.

[01:57:01] Chair Alison Hicks: Still not working. Okay, maybe we can come back to you, Mary. Is there someone else? Good Mary sometime. April Webster. April.

[01:57:19] April Webster: Thanks. Can hear me?

[01:57:21] Chair Alison Hicks: Yes.

[01:57:21] April Webster: Perfect. Um, so I was really wanting to talk about moving forward in a process and how do we, you know, the implementation.

[01:57:28] Chair Alison Hicks: Be a little louder.

[01:57:29] April Webster: Can you hear me? I'm yelling. you hear me?

[01:57:32] Chair Alison Hicks: Okay keep yelling.

[01:57:34] April Webster: Can you restart my time?

[01:57:36] Chair Alison Hicks: Sure.

[01:57:36] April Webster: Thank you.

[01:57:39] Chair Alison Hicks: There's been some issues with the sound recently.

[01:57:41] April Webster: Okay, I'm ready. you hear me?

[01:57:43] Chair Alison Hicks: Yes.

[01:57:44] April Webster: Okay. I just want to start saying I was, I'm really disappointed about not being able to focus on what I wanted to tonight, my comments, um, and that's implementation and how we move from policy and plans into delivery. But I, instead, uh, find myself needing to focus on a few claims I've heard tonight. First, uh, staff, um, Continuing this, that continuing to evaluate a road diet could require design, a redesign, and jeopardize a project timeline. Um, That raises a really important question. Why was the either a non-road a road diet design advanced at the same time while the traffic analysis was underway? We only did the non-ro diet design. Um, traffic analysis is really only useful if you do it earlier enough to actually shape the project? Um, if it happens, uh, if only one design direction is advanced, then the public input, um, and even the analysis really doesn't have ability to affect the outcome, which then, um, you know, talking about that whole process, um, and also on grant timing. I wanted to jump onto that. Sorry. Um, I don't think we should assume that O bag 3 deadline prevents design changes without until we confirm with MTC, BT, and Caltrans. Um, I work with MTC on one of their committees. And I spoke with them back in March, 2025. They told me the OBAG 3 deadline should not prevent the city from reevaluating or and or modifying the project design to address public input. Um, we should check and see if the flexibility still applies. It's a year later, but we knew about a year ago and staff was added to that thread in June. Um, Then in terms of Nacto, I'm reading from the urban bikeway design guide, um, on the designing protected bike lanes chapter. It says motor vehicle lanes should be narrowed to support the widest feasible bike lanes. At posted speeds of 35 miles per hour less, general purposes traveling can be 10 foot wide and still support transit and truck uses. Where transit or heavy trucks are rare. A traveling of 9 feet is acceptable width for a general purpose, traveling.

[02:00:04] Chair Alison Hicks: Okay, so now the time is up. Thank you. Okay. Next. With Chambers. Cliff.

[02:00:21] Cliff Chambers: Hi, uh, Cliff Chambers, resident of Mountain View. I just want to reiterate a few things that have said in both April's letter and James Cozumel had wrote a very thoughtful and great letter and I hope you've all read it. First off, with the O bag deadline. Professionally, I did a lot of work and contracts with MTC and they regularly extended contracts, changed it. If there's community input, They make changes. So please look into that. And if you, if staff hasn't asked them, I hope that uh, staff asks staff to check with MTC to make sure that it is indeed a constraint. Um, I think the whole corridor needs to be thought of because the, it is a whole corridor and the draft, um, uh, ATP plan, uh, class 4 along all of Middlefield Road. One of the things that does the whole of the discussion of the road diet focuses on all the constraints and it doesn't talk about the benefits, the safety benefits, the reductions of speed. That is why we did the California street because of a fatal accident. There are a lot of benefits of road diets that are not covered in the staff report. I am all for along the entire corridor, having quote-time bike lanes in the interim before it even goes to class four. It's extremely dangerous. If you go out on Crittendon middle school. Students learn how to ride the bikes in those lanes, and then on the weekends, they have to cut into the main traffic lanes. It's dangerous. Somebody's gonna get killed. There's somebody mentioned earlier that Middlefield is a drag street. It's true. I live right on middle field. People oftentimes go 50, 55 miles an hour between, uh, Ranchdorf and old Middlefield. We need to reduce the speeds. We need to reduce the speed limit. If we can't have a road diet, we need to think about speed limits. Thank you.

[02:02:31] Chair Alison Hicks: Thank you. Jesse? Jesse? You're out.

[02:02:42] Jesse: Hey, thank you.

[02:02:46] Chair Alison Hicks: Oh. Jesse?

[02:02:50] Jesse: Oh, hey. Can you hear me now?

[02:02:52] Chair Alison Hicks: Yes.

[02:02:53] Jesse: Okay, great. So I bike on this road and um, I just want to agree with everyone else who's been saying it's, it's a dangerous road to bike on, particularly when, uh, people are parking in the bike lane all the time when they're not supposed to be. So, that, that's an easy fix to make that bike. Lane. Permanent. I support narrowing the lanes, reducing the speed limit, having a permanent, protected bike lane. All that good stuff. Um, and it's just a little disappointed to hear that the vehicle miles traveled is, um, apparently, given so much weight, and it's kind of like the end all the all, and, um, yeah, it'll be more congested if we do a road diet. But do we know how many people are gonna switch to biking? How many more people will walk on the street? Um, and how much safer it's gonna be? I really think human life should come 1st over. you know, some congestion, and people will reroute to other roads as well. So, I know we've had, uh, some really great protected bike things put in on El Camino Real, and on California Street. And I'm wondering, has the city, done a full before and after to see, you know, how much, um, bicycle and pedestrian, activity goes up after those changes, because I've even seen it. I know it's a significant increase, but I don't know if it's, you know, are people writing their bikes 100% more, 200% more? Do we have the count? and could that be used as kind of an estimate to say like, oh, yeah, we're going to, um, through the road diet or through, you know, whatever measures we take, fewer people will end up driving here, but we can expect approximately, you know, this much of an increase, um, in people walking and biking and, and using back to transportation. So I really think that should be kind of the standard as they consider the the benefits. Um, not just the downsides to raw diets. Thank you.

[02:04:55] Chair Alison Hicks: Thank you. Mary Jane? Mary, you're up again. Hope this works better. Oh,

[02:05:09] Mary Dateo: sounds better. Okay. So, I am, uh, happy to see about, uh, the more protected bike lanes and the parking's going to be removed. But we're just reminded that Middlefield's a high injury network. And I think we all realize that a lot of people drive much faster and that this endangers all members of the public, including the drivers, cyclists, and walkers. So if we sent officers out all the time to enforce it. That would be expensive. Um, there's a much lower cost method that we've been hearing. Um, that reliably reduces speeding and that's to narrow the lane with. So, um, that would be a permanent corrective action that could be implemented with without too much cost via paint. Um, Caltrans is demonstrating on ECR that 10.5 foot wide lanes are workable. I would suggest that the primary questions to ask about the 10.5 foot wide lanes on El Camino. Um, are not, is not, the question is not whether box trucks feel crowded next to buses, but instead, whether speeding's been reduced, and whether the total number of accidents and the severity of accidents have been reduced on El Camino. So I think one lane, um, on each side of the road and in the new design should be reduced at least at 10.5 or 10 feet, to encourage vehicles to drive at the speed limit and to create more space for bike lanes. I think more bike lane space is going to, um, bike lane space is going to grow in importance as more bikes and especially e-bikes. Start using these lanes because bikes are going to need to be able to pass each other. Um, they're gonna need space for passing. Also, um, I think a road diet should be considered at least for the overpass. On the street in Palo Alto reduces down to one lane, and traffic moves along just fine there. So I think, uh, road diet, uh, as you're approaching and leaving the overpass is perfectly reasonable to uh, to consider. Thank you.

[02:07:06] Chair Alison Hicks: Thank you That's fun. One more virtual. One more virtual and then we'll take one away. Tracy.

[02:07:27] Tracy: Yes, can you hear me now?

[02:07:29] Chair Alison Hicks: Yes.

[02:07:29] Tracy: Um, sorry, of course, now my dogs are gonna bark because I heard you. Uh, I just wanted to say that I support the letter by April and the comments by the public. I do live on Farley Street, which is right off of Middlefield. I could be going up and down Middlefield on my bike, but I do not feel safe enough to do it. So I definitely support a road diet. Um, I even, my grandson uh, works over in Charleston Plaza, his little after school job, and I basically have to drive him there. One time I was busy and I was like, uh, Can't you ride your bike? It's not very far. And he's like, uh, he wrote it. He's like, I'm never doing that again. So, And I can't ask him. Then I paid more attention to it even, and I really can't ask him to do that. So we're doing extra trips up and down middle fields. I would love it if it extended further. I know it's not part of this project. I just want to say that I do support having safer bike lanes. When I lived in Palo Alto, that was one of the things I did love that Bryant Street was really a place where I can go up and down the city without really a lot of worries about cars, but here in Mountain View, I don't have as many. I really appreciate that you're thinking and planning towards it. And uh, thank you. Thank you. And

[02:09:02] Chair Alison Hicks: no more virtual speakers? Is that true? Uh, no more. I think this is our last in person speaker. Bro

[02:09:11] Pearl Leeman: Lehman. I'm a city resident. Um, and I think one thing is if if we could consider the question around the road diet. A way to think about it might be what are the alternatives that our commuters have and what are the alternatives that bike and pedestrian computers have. Right now, car commuters have central Expressway, and they also have 101, not far from a car perspective. Bicyclists, as, you know, mentioned by this other cyclist, don't have another alternative for going this direction in any kind of a safe way. So if we're going to like look at this question around, because I think there was a question of saying, like, if we do a road diet, we weren't commuting through volume. But that might just move that volume through the Central Expressway or to 101, which are most unreasonable, I think, commuting options for people trying to go any kind of a distance. Bikes don't have any kind of option. And on the pedestrian piece. I would love you guys to think about that overpath. I know there was a question around timing, but, you know, if folks look at the situation right now, Stevens Creek is a very common walking and biking path and it empties out where there is no pedestrian overpass option over 85. And there's even no good way to cross field anywhere near there. And so we are seeing people walking, um, on a very unsafe portion of middle field there. So I think like, That's something to just bring back is make sure that the pedestrian option there for being able to cross over 85 is a solid option given how well it connects up with other fantastic. Thank you. Okay,

[02:10:45] Chair Alison Hicks: so last check, I think we're done with with speakers. Do you see anymore? Okay, so questions and the questions that have come out and comments. I'm sorry. Okay, so, um, one

[02:11:06] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: of the things that, Came up with this 3 street, play green street checklist, and if that would be possible for future projects, Does that have an answer? Um,

[02:11:21] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: I don't know if I saw the question before, but yes, so. It

[02:11:24] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: came in as part of the letter. I think that I think that is a question. Um, so

[02:11:33] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: for projects that are, uh, funded regionally, such as our measure B, for, uh, projects that complete streets checklist is a requirement of ETA. So that was actually filled out in 2022 when we applied for the grant and that went through the VPAC process for the VPAC at that time. Oh, so. All projects going forward would do that same, same effort at the time they are kind of initiated. whether they're regional or not. I should, all projects with regional funding. will go through that. Typically our larger projects, larger orders are the ones we offer regional. California or Monte or this one. Um, smaller projects like a resurfacing would not be subject to this because we don't usually go, although there's more stream maintenance for no residential streets. So we, we, we are in compliance with the, with the complete streets policy. Um, and going forward if there are updates. One part of the question is that the complete streets checklist today looks different than 2022 because it's frequently updated. Oh. Yeah. Yeah. Durango.

[02:12:52] Assistant Public Works Director Arango: Um, just to follow up, um, um, Gonzalez very well comprehensively address that. Um, I think start reading between the lines a little bit is, do we apply this to all projects? Yes, I think that was I think that's where questions you're going to get it too. Um, So to answer your question on that, um, it depends on the type of projects. When we're identifying a complete street project, It does make sense to apply. So I know that we have the next one that we're looking at, I believe, is Frankstorf. Um so that we would apply it there. But it is applied to every single project, as it depends on the scope that we're doing. Sometimes we're not doing it in general, we pursue a portion. We may be just doing just general maintenance. But if we are, have identified a corridor, that it absolutely makes sense to you, then... Okay,

[02:13:40] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: so right now, the ones I'm remembering are California, middlefield, right? Perfectly, Star Trek, is in progress. Yeah. But those, those 3 are the ones that I don't recall out on top of my head that are, they're like, complete, great street projects. Love it. Oh, love it. Yes, how could I forget? Always. Okay. Um, there was some public comment about quick build. And I was just wondering if that kind of address that is that's. Um, I think that there was an idea that we could link it to the active transportation plan that's, you know, in progress, but, um, how we might be able to add. Now. I don't I don't know. I'm trying to understand. But

[02:14:32] Chair Alison Hicks: that sounds like part of the question. Yes. Yeah, from

[02:14:38] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: all my job. I'll

[02:14:41] Assistant Public Works Director Arango: try to tackle the 1st part here. Okay. Robust can,

[02:14:47] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: can we understand the implications of what, a quick build program is on the city here? Yeah, I think some context to that, right?

[02:14:55] Assistant Public Works Director Arango: I'm getting this, um, from your question. How can a quick bill be implemented? What's that type of difference like? Um, I think I'll start the 1st half and then maybe if the director has anything to add. As we've are stepping back and looking at the old department. Um, we are splitting off the transportation planning and private engineering discussion. Um, that may be a good opportunity to really, um, get

[02:15:21] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: the cohesion between the planning, uh, church, church planning and travel engineering. They

[02:15:26] Assistant Public Works Director Arango: already are well communicate well together. Um, but under one division, I think that would really help. And I think at that time, we can evaluate what a program looks like for. How we implement that. How can we engage our street maintenance, folks, or other vendors to identify a kind of level of frequence?

[02:15:44] Chair Alison Hicks: I have to piggyback off that and ask a question. Um, So when you're talking about how to implement quick bills, is BPAC gas, can you advance the parking removal? And, uh, put in 24 hour bike lanes ahead of the rest of the project. In essence, isn't that a quick build, sort of a request, or is a quick build, something other?

[02:16:08] Assistant Public Works Director Arango: I interpret a quick build really to be something that you're implementing in the field. Um, that is really a new improvement, something that changes. Um, I guess in theory we are changing. parking restriction, but I'm envisioning, you know, an intersection improvement, uh, a corridor section improvement and adding something that is more related to its equipment. Okay,

[02:16:30] Chair Alison Hicks: if you did that, did eliminated the parking and in a 24 hour bike lane with plastic ballers, then it's that a quick bill.

[02:16:40] Assistant Public Works Director Arango: That could be considered, yes. Trying

[02:16:42] Chair Alison Hicks: to, yeah. And

[02:16:43] Assistant Public Works Director Arango: again, once, um, you know, we are, we reorganize the upper works department and have this. Engineering division. I think that's an element that things really put into a figure out. What kind of resources are going to do? Okay, sorry for...

[02:17:05] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Yes, okay, so I'm now remembering. And this is kind of in context to a project I found, so, um, this, not only do we have pedestrians and cyclists, uh, as users. This is the PTA classroom, that's nice. And so, um, And I recall the conversation about the duckout, particularly in front of, uh, the one upcoming, um, project. So, as we are doing improvements along middle field, and I just, I missed it in any of the, um, attachments. I don't recall. How will we be addressing the safety? of the new class 4 bike lanes with the existing, this existing VTA bus route. Okay, that makes sense. It

[02:17:56] Assistant Public Works Director Arango: did make sense. Um, so I think you're referring to the 490 East Pogo project at the...

[02:18:05] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Yes. Like that's just one example, but the bus stops along that corridor. Sure. So

[02:18:13] Assistant Public Works Director Arango: I think, um, for just the bus stops on the border, I'm going to let Junior Gonzalez, um, kind of initiate that response, and then I

[02:18:21] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: can speak to 49 minutes. Sure. So the project is 35%. Uh, we're moving into 65%, we're just initiating our conversation to Caltrans. So there is time to look at those treatments and see if there's ways to over those. But at this point, we would be creating a blue collar conflict zone. So all of the green striping that you see typically see in intersections or on driveways, that would be the same type of treatment you would see at a bus stop. So, um, bus drivers, vehicle, uh, drivers, and bike and cyclists are all kind of cute that this is a conflict zone. Um, so, the other recommendation that was evaluated was, could you have in laying stops for, for buses? In some cases, those are practical and feasible, and a lot of other cases, you need additional right of way. You have to find a way to scoop the bikes and the pedestrians behind the bus for those to look. So it's a lot more work to make those work. So we can evaluate, uh, case by case basis to look to see if there's opportunities there, but right now we have the conflict striking in the lane and in the bus stop area, um, so we can, essentially, there's a we. Is,

[02:19:36] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: um, when this comes, sorry, before I forget, again, when this comes back to cancel, my staff be able to work for GTA, let us know just how that stops. There are, oh, on that mental pill for, oh, directions. I just think that would be like helpful context for us to understand just. Yes. Okay, great.

[02:19:58] Assistant Public Works Director Arango: Yes, and then to your question regarding specifically to the development at 490's middle field. So we expect that, um, The Middlefield Complete streets project is going to be constructed. before the development. So then, as part of the development process, Um, we do a pretty detailed view of development projects. As part of that is the hypothesites or the sidewalk, per, bike lane, travel lanes, any modifications. They will be. We're coordinating with the developer, but there's going to be a doubt. So with that, and so much of what, um, 1st of all, James, I always mentioned about how we'll evaluate those weeds. And the proper application of bike lane treatments, another stitch. We would do that as well. That would be an effort to make sure that safe, um, provides enough decision, excuse me for visibility. Um, and that the treatments we're applying there, make most sense. So we do that with the development application. They would submit the plans, we'd review it. We make sure that, you know, the middle field, the street process with me. And then they're coming in and basically...

[02:21:08] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Okay, yeah, I think I'm less concerned about that project and more about if that would exist along the court, a lot of corridor, if we would see, you know, maybe other redevelopments, do that same thing, and if that, that's kind of where I was like, that, thank you. Um, and then, um, one of, one of the things that I had brought up, we're looking at that project is that aren't a lot of, uh, cues on what the speed limit is. And so in a, I, I'm curious if in addition to, um, removal of the parking prior to the complete street project going forward, if we could just add some more signage on what? The speed limit is, because I have lived at Moffat in Middlefield, and now I live near Middlefield in Wisman, and I do think a lot of the speeding is there are no signs. I can walk from Ellis to Wisman, and I don't even think there's a sign, at least on that right. that right side. Um, I don't even know if there's... Yeah,

[02:22:17] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: so that whole, yes, that whole block. Which is very large, right? Have no signage and I think that's why people go. 50 plus. Is that something that that could look at doing as part? I think recommendation. I would just ask colleagues. Okay, great. Sorry, to get it. Do

[02:22:41] Chair Alison Hicks: you like a strong home or right? I

[02:22:44] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: don't know if there's any other questions, but those, those are the ones that I'm now remembering, like, the future ever live, letting me ask. You're on a roll. Uh. Okay, well... It's just, it's gonna go to counseling. Yes, that

[02:23:05] Chair Alison Hicks: is, uh, Yeah, I think, uh...

[02:23:10] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: We just looking.

[02:23:11] Chair Alison Hicks: Yeah, it's information. Yeah,

[02:23:14] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: I mean, well, they think staff. Very much. Thanks to the residents in the community for that. I think, um, 11 of the things that I, that comes to mind is, that we can move forward with, like, this version of the complete streets project, and it won't preclude us from looking in the future of a potential road. I think that. I'd love to see if. The improvements that we make will help address the concern that residents have about the user experience on middle field. Um, Before moving to a road hike. Um, I think when we have looked, When the city tends to look at, um, What is the process of culture, the speed reduction, um, the, the, there's, um, different levels with which there's different options with which you can choose, and I think there's different levers with which we trigger, depending on what the issue is in the neighborhood. Um, and so, I would see this as, um, complete street project as being kind of step one, um, as of an improvement, I think, moving to from class 2 to class four. Um, I think, um, move being able to remove that parking, um, immediately, putting more signage, all of those will be heavy improvements, um, to what exists now. I'm, um, encourage that staff is already in my nose, but at least for the Caltran segment, it sounds like there's a path forward, not too long after, um, The design moves forward for, from, design resort of this project, for the project. Um, um, While I'm concerned about the CPUC DA section. I think the most immediate is just the middle field corridor in general and then the overpass over 85. Um, Because I, um, I do see people scurrying across, but it always makes my, That make churn. Um, but there is an entrance on the side where they're, uh, an exit entrance on the side where the sidewalk is for the trail. Um, so, um, I'm not sure which side people are on the other side, which, how they're, how they're getting out there because there's um, no path on that side. Um, But I think we're headed in the right direction. Um, and I do feel like, Just because we don't have a recent number for a member McAllister, somebody who walks and runs in that area. I am seeing more people out and I do see more development coming in. We have a new user who is, um, in, in the space. Um, on Ellis, and so I'm already seeing a lot of walking and talking meetings happening. So I think the sooner we can make improvements, um, the better.

[02:26:56] Chair Alison Hicks: Okay, member McAllister.

[02:26:58] Committee Member John McAlister: Okay. Um, I'm a little more, uh, okay, I'm not as suggested as, you guys have said. I have this is specializing today. So I'm gonna probably be a little more pragmatic and more objective. This project, the concept behind the project. I support, not a road diet. I had conversations with others that, We are still a car centric. This is a regional quarter. And, yes, we have, we have El Camino, we have central, but those get bogged down because there's a lot of, uh, Commerce modelers, we still need to have ways to get through. Highway 101 is always backed up. But that's besides, we have North corridors that we need to be very conscious about, Ramp Road, Almani, San Antonio, we have East, West, like Cuesta. We have El Camino, we have Middlefield, and so we still need to be constant that cars are not going away. They're still here. And when I bring up the numbers, I was like, see, what is the data to support these projects? I see a lot of passionate people. And their desire to put this in, and every time I see public comment, people say, oh, there's a lot of support for it. Well, of course you're going to see a lot of support because these people are wanting these particular changes. But we still have a silent majority out there that I sort of represent. This is a place I need to get point A to point B and I want to get there efficiently and safety. I don't see a large percentage of a city bicyclist. I understand that they're maybe 3% are people on bikes. And so for us to spend money, which is limited for us for the city, we have a lot of projects that I want to see a demand. I want to see a critical mass of people using it. Now, spend 1000000s of dollars on a project that only benefits. So many, a few. That, that's, I, I need to be able to feel better about supporting it. Uh, they're talking about road diets. There was just recently, making the lane smaller. Just recently, we had a report from the fire department. The fire department said, The response time is slowing down because of congestion. And all of a sudden you're taking major artery, and you make the lane smaller. And I think that's going to affect them, that was brought up by staff, the emergency response for people to get there. And we do not want to choke any, any, uh, access that the public safety needs to get to certain. I did spend, I said, I watched EPC, uh, BPAC, and my comments and uh, They, again, they're passionate, but I want to see data. Uh, We saw data from 2018. How many people are really using? We saw a traffic accident. from 2019. And it's a hives thing. So in some regards, I see people looking at this subjectively, not objectively. And this is a broader, for what I see throughout any project that comes along. So from 2019, yeah, 20, 2014 to 2019, there's 26 accents. Well, people say it's getting worse. Well, how can you say that unless you we have the data to support projects like that? That's my feeling how we go forward on it. The green space, the ATP, all that stuff I support. Because that gold enhance people, but that doesn't mean that just because you build it, they will come. And um, Valerie don't hate me for this one. I have a business right on El Camino. I, there, all the time, and I did not see people using, you know, to what some people say expected. So when I hear people say there's a lot of command for it. Let's hear the data, how do you come up with that? They say people will get to the El Camino. It's very... I would not ride on you. It's not a road. So, I'm always conscious about, the mountain when I hear input, I ask the example of 1700 people. Uh, postcards were sent out, and we got 28 back. You know, to me, that's, uh, There's not a big demand or there's a lot of, there's not that much interest. So you always have to put in the back of your mind. Yes, the people that are here that speak. They are want to be heard, they can be safe, and I support effort. I appreciate their passion, but I don't see that they are the, all and people saying this, we gotta do something. So, that was more of a broader context of what I was saying. And, uh, I appreciate staff looking at something and realizing, maybe I could be one. But yes, this is a regional quarters, put in there. We still have to be considerate about people moving out because if we don't have these racial quarters, Or to the young gentlemen, the persons came in, where are they going to go? They're going to go on side streets. No doubt about they're gonna hit any way they can get there and ways is gonna figure it out. And so we still need those major quarters to get people from from Palo Alto to Sunnyvale, from Los Altos, Los Altos Hills to 101. They need to be able to keep moving. We, we need to be able to have that service so that it helps our residents. I'll raise itself. I support the recommendation, but those are things that I think we need to be aware of. Hey,

[02:32:42] Chair Alison Hicks: thank you very much. So my comments are, I agree with both my committee members, people will continue to use cards, hopefully electric ones, which, yes, getting expensive. Um, but, uh, also, I think this is an area where, uh, people are going to use, use bikes more, and particularly, I particularly agree with the speaker, uh, talk about electric bikes, e-bikes, and kind of the changing nature. I think that this is where those particularly might be used. I think it's a little different than El Camino, because El Camino has, this is kind of a lovely corridor in terms of, it's not all the way there, but it has a lot of trees. has the medium. I mean, I know El Camino has a median too, but, um, this has fewer lands than El Camino, and I feel like once, uh, you know, our, our, Whatever that was one precise plan I was recused from is formerly named Northwest, Eastwest, Westman precise plan. When that gets, further build out, I feel like, you know, there's a large portion of this that's residential, I feel like the use will change, and I, I like, that, that you're slowly moving, you know, a half foot here, a foot there into the buffer lane, or whatever, which I buffer between the bikers and pedestrians and the cars. So to me, the critical things for right now are, you know, like the pack said, um, moving off the, the, um, parking removal, and possibly even putting in bollards. I'm not a huge fan of bollards, but and I was like, I really liked hearing from neighbors and what they envision. I'm thinking this is a paving project, but we have our active transportation project. And I'm hoping we'll quickly make that a safer bike route. You know, with the constraints of staff, you know, as soon as we can. And migrate as much of the length because we can. I mean, I would say maybe do one, maybe you could consider 110 foot car lane, migrate as much as we can into the buffer. Um, and maybe at some point in the future. Um, you know, because I'm, I, at some point in the future, maybe that buffer can become a green buffer, which I've seen in other places in Wilson photographs. Um, the place I drive to my mom's. My creek is actually pretty similar to this. And it has a somewhat narrow green buffer for the bike lance. Um, okay, so, uh, I also, um, let's see if, so, I would like to hear in the future from neighbors, what they feel about the plastic bollards, um, many people feel they're not that safe and not that nice in front of residential places. We got them in temporarily. What do people want? You know, how do people feel about them? And, you know, she. What, what kind of priority and where should, you know, occur or green strip be? Um, But that, I think, is more for the future. I think that also I've heard a lot, and I agree with, uh, member Kame about doing anything we can to, um, reduce the speeds, whether it be, uh, and what is the speed supposed to be there? I just looked it up. I just drove there. I didn't see anything. 35, right? supposed to be 35? Yeah. So when when I went to planning school, we would talk about how streets read, which just means like when you're driving down the street, does it kind of say to you, do you kind of get the impression? This is kind of like a freeway and I should be going 40 or 50. And honestly, that is the feeling I get when I'm there. So I want to give people the feeling. That they should be going slow. Um, so, eventually, probably, small marine tires is what I would want. But I think that's more a thing for the ATV. Then in addition, so, I'm agreeing with previous members, you know, uh, and BPAC, which is advance the parking removal, given staff constraints, do anything we can to slow down. Uh, speeds. And this is maybe more for the ATP, but look at, possible green infrastructure and, um, And, uh, you know, maybe over time, we will be able to have a road diet because everybody will be on e-bikes and on the mass transportation area. Um, and then my last thing is that we did get a group letter from really a lot of people put a lot of work into it. And, uh, it has 4 or 5 requests, many of them about processed and we've kind of been bringing it up during this meeting. Um, but some of it is about climbing. Um, and also, uh, as a member committee said, uh, a complete green street screening checklist. And as Mr. Gonzalez said, that's, you know, maybe changing over time. So maybe, so they're making some requests around that, and then which type of biodiversity plan. So, sort of highlighting that. Um. And I think we talked about the rest of the items there, so those are all of my comments, and thank you for all of your work. Do you? Any, did that trigger any final comments for anyone? I think, uh, when does it come to house? So

[02:38:52] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: we'll take this to counselor, wouldn't we? have final, um, PSNA, class and specifications. So we won't see this until the fall or later. The last slide we show. Yeah,

[02:39:05] Chair Alison Hicks: well, you'll be coming outside. Sorry. Is that okay? We'll

[02:39:10] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: invite you back as a special guest. We still need to go through the Caltrans process. So they need to provide the design input where there's processings with 85 into 37. And then also the, um, the obey 3 grant process has its own set of a set of checklists that we need to set through. That takes 6 months right there.

[02:39:35] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Well, I would, I, I think what could be helpful is just being able to share with, um, the community, if they're, Staff, Bob, on, like, green, and complete streets, greening checklist for patient projects, and then, um, the quick build program. I think that that will continue to come up. And so I would just ask if stuff could maybe have so far on it. Put that on the agenda, some report. No, no, like, I think as these projects come forward, like, we're, we're gonna, that might be a continued fishing. Yes, um, or make it part of the APP. I don't know. I think it's just worth maybe pulling that thread a little bit and just. Where that might fit into all the other things. You know, I mean, we're uh, we've been into ATE, uh, right now we have to keep it regional, uh, or in the size or scope. I don't know. Like you said, you know, there's, um, you know, a few ideas and requests of a letter, so just, um, having some sort of response, probably be appreciated, um, because I think we're, because especially we, I think I listed 4 or 5 complete street projects that the city was looking at. So, as those conversations continue on too, and we evaluate those, it just might be a helpful part, like, as part of the conversation.

[02:41:02] Chair Alison Hicks: Yeah, no, I like that you brought that up again. I think the community put a lot of work into that letter, and we brought it up in various ways tonight, but I think it will continue to come up. So if you can take it as a, a, um, you know, a guideline set of guidelines for future projects. Because whether you do or not, I think it's going to continue to come up. So. Remember McAllister, you look sad.

[02:41:32] Committee Member John McAlister: No, I just, no, I have a lot of work. I got to get, you know, green and I'm thinking green stripes. You're talking. I know Vegetation green. So I gotta change that a little bit. I thought this, El Camino, 10 years ago, was considered going to be a great moment. You look at El Camino now. It's a little hard to envision what they thought 10 years ago. No, the thing is, the checked is. We used to have 5 bike shops about. I don't think we have any now. So. Just something to think about when.

[02:42:14] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: The repair cafe.com.

[02:42:19] Committee Member John McAlister: Yeah. Yeah. My thing. Yeah, I know. That's why I said it. But they come and they go around or our break rodeos brings a mobile bike. But that's still a nodial. Maybe that's when you consider the popularity. It's it's not this...

[02:42:40] Chair Alison Hicks: No, I agree with you. And that's part of our previous, you know, maybe somebody should put a bike shop in my ground floor. Well,

[02:42:46] Committee Member John McAlister: then, we were looking at the e-bikes at our last meeting. And if e-blags start using your protected black lights. There's where you may have potential. So. What's your day?

6.1 Staff Comments

[02:43:06] Chair Alison Hicks: Okay, so, I keep, those are the final comments, and we will close this item. And move on now to uh, item number 6, which is committee staff announcements, updates, requests, and committee for it. No, 1st we have 6.one is staff comment. Um. And, uh, Jennifer in from what, director of what? Actually, no stuff. No, I can't move on. Okay. Um, so now we move to staff to

6.2 Committee Comments

[02:43:47] Chair Alison Hicks: 6.2. Which is committee comments. Do any committee members have comments or reports to share?

[02:43:56] Committee Member John McAlister: No, I thought you brought photographs. I just wanted to show you guys. We don't need to take the time status. I just want you, if there's some, you look at them, and you see something that resonates with you, then, then we'll, we'll back back with them. I just don't want to. Okay,

[02:44:15] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: I have some action too. Okay. So I have some, I have some, I have some eyes on this, either way.

[02:44:25] Chair Alison Hicks: I like you sharing photos and I will be sharing mine at the next meeting.

[02:44:29] Committee Member John McAlister: Well, I think pictures were,

[02:44:31] Chair Alison Hicks: and they will be pictures of, uh, the place I drive by that I think Middlefield Road.

[02:44:40] Committee Member John McAlister: Those are just examples. It's not. What you think? Your initials not. Maybe we can look at it and come socially.

[02:44:53] Chair Alison Hicks: So now we're at the part of the agenda where members of the public, joining us virtually or in person, can provide comments on the staff and the, staff and council. Uh, comments that we didn't have. As

[02:45:12] Public Speaker: a member of public. I'm very curious about the photographs. Yeah. Here, you,

[02:45:18] Chair Alison Hicks: I will share. Feels like that kind of got talked about with, I share my photographs with the remaining members of the public who are here, if they remain. They were discussed, even though they're all... They weren't discussed. Well, it's good. Not disgusting. Yes, so that. Well, it's a commit,

[02:45:43] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: we're still doing committee reporters, I think.

[02:45:45] Chair Alison Hicks: Yes. Do you have any reports also? No, I just, yes. Well, yeah, this is the part where the public gets to weigh in and sort of. Well,

[02:45:57] Public Speaker: there's a way in that you didn't. That's pictures that you can't share every year. Unfortunately, I only share in a person. I said zero. Okay. Remember McAllister mentioned these photographs. So they, I think they are part of public records. Right. Right. And I guess I might, and our comment is what's interesting about these pictures. Just, just...

[02:46:27] Unknown Speaker: How things are wrong, that's all. Okay. So

7. ADJOURNMENT

[02:46:37] Chair Alison Hicks: these are pictures of recent. Um, recent projects. Now, are there any virtual speakers? Okay. So, um. We will now move to item number seven, which is a journal. Thank you so much for joining us, our next council transportation committee meeting will be on June 16th, 2026. And the meeting is adjourned at 847 p.m. Thank you.

• ← Previous
• Next →