Aug. 31, 2026 Council Transportation Committee

Video

Agenda

• 1. CALL TO ORDER (00:00:00)
• 2. ROLL CALL (00:00:00)
• 3. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC (00:00:57)
• 4. MINUTES APPROVAL (00:03:59)
• 4.1 Approve Meeting Minutes: Approve the Council Transportation Committee meeting minutes of June 16, 2026. (00:03:59)
• 5. NEW BUSINESS (00:03:59)
• 5.1 Rengstorff Complete Streets Study, Project 25-39: Enter Staff Recommendation Here, in Regular Text (00:03:59)
• 5.2 Active Transportation Plan-Final: Enter Staff Recommendation Here, in Regular Text (02:32:54)
• 6. COMMITTEE/STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS, UPDATES, REQUESTS, AND COMMITTEE REPORTS (04:17:53)
• 6.1 Committee Comments (04:17:53)
• 7. ADJOURNMENT (04:18:21)

Transcript

2. ROLL CALL

[00:00:00] Chair Alison Hicks: You should be okay. Okay, so I'm gonna restart the meeting because apparently people online. We're not able to hear us. Uh, we're going to start. Uh, this is with number one, a call order. Uh, welcome to the council transportation committee meeting of August 31, 2026. The meeting has now started, still 601. Um, this is a hybrid meeting allowing public comment both in person and virtually instructions for addressing the committee virtually, may be found on the post agenda. Now we're at item number two, which is roll call. The public works director will take attendance by role.

[00:00:42] Public Works Director Ng: I see Chair Hicks in person. I see Kenny member McAllister in person, and do we have council member, uh, committee member, um, today online? I don't see her. Hopefully our way.

3. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC

[00:00:57] Chair Alison Hicks: Okay. So we'll assume that council member may well arrive and attend with us virtually eventually. Um, we are now uh, moving to item number 3, which is oral communications. This part of the meeting is reserved for people wishing to address the committee on a 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 asking unknown agenda items. So would any member of the public on, uh, on the line or in person, like write comment on non-agenda items. Um, if you're online, it's like the right hand button in Zoom. And, uh, I see someone in person has approached left turn in person 1st and staff will display the timer on the street. There,

[00:01:53] Valerie Fenwick: I'm Valerie Fennick, a longtime resident of Mountain View, specifically of Rex Manor. I think almost nearly 30 years. And I really want to thank the CTC in the council for doing the California complete streets project, an experiment, all the things that we've learned. I now feel a lot safer walking there. I walked to San Antonio Center to watch movies or to go to dinner. And I really just wanted to thank you and say how much I really love that. And now I've spiked on that road where I never would have before and, uh, and I really, um, and I still also drive on that road. I actually drive on it more than I ride or bike or walk and uh, still very awesome and really, um, I'm glad, I can't wait to see what city has learned from that and what we can take to our other future projects. I just want to say thank you.

[00:02:40] Chair Alison Hicks: Thank you. Are there any other in person speakers? The items not on the agenda. Um,

[00:02:51] Caroline Horn: I'm Caroline Horn. I'm a resident of Los Altos, but I go through Mountain View very often from the train, um, uh, stationed to my house, and I really also want to 2nd that feedback about California Street. I find that it's so much easier and safer. It's really transformed by. That combined with the El Camino bike lanes. has really been wonderful. I've also enjoyed doing on El Camino bike lanes and going to these restaurants and things like province. I haven't been to in a very long time because I'm usually doing some other. Um, so it's been really great to be able to see this kind of correlated, um, uh, infrastructure for bicycles. Also, um, I want you to know that Los Altos, uh, has a project, a grant to work on San Antonio Road. And I would love to see all of the tri-cities, Palo Alto, Mountain View, and Los Altos work together, to make a really wonderful San Antonio road that gets us all the way down to foothill, and then up to, um, the parks. Thank you very much for all the work you've been doing. Thank you.

5.1 Rengstorff Complete Streets Study, Project 25-39

[00:03:59] Chair Alison Hicks: Any other in-person speakers? So, do we have virtual speakers for general public health? There are no raised here. Okay. In that case, um, we'll close uh, oral communications and go on to item number 4 which is minutes approval. Uh, these are the minutes from June 16, 2026. Um, with any member of the public joining us virtually or in person, like to provide comments on the minute. If so, uh, click the raise hand button and zoom or search the lectron. Any comments on the minutes? Do you see any online? Now. Okay. Um, Then I will bring the item back for committee deliberation and action. Are there any corrections or comments on the minutes? Um, member. May is she here? I don't see your name there. Okay, then would any of the members like to move the minutes? Okay. All those in favor, raise their hands. Unanimously among those here. Okay. Um, we are now on item number 5, which is new business. Um, This is, uh, we're at 5.one, the rent store of complete street study, which is project 2539. Um. The staff presentation will be provided by Peyote Ahmed, transportation planner and Lauren Ledbetter, transportation manager. Um, Adam Danberg, Kimley Horn, uh, consultant will be available to answer questions after the staff presentation. Um, and we're going to, uh, remember McAllister's request try a slightly different order here. We're going to have public comment after the presentation. And then cancel questions and comments. We'll see how that works. Okay. So, um, with that, uh, presentation please. Um,

[00:06:22] Transportation Planner Ahmed: good afternoon. CDC members. I'm here to have a transmission planner with city of Mountain View and we are here with an informational item on Rainstorm Avenue complete street study. It is a planning study, which is funded by Cal Transplanting Grant. To meet the grand deadline, this study will need to be completed by June 2027. And tonight we are here to receive the correction from CPC, honoring storm avenue corridor priorities and all the 3 draft alternatives. About the project schedule. We started this study in November 2025. Instead, we completed outreach round one and existing conditions and background review. We also developed all track positive alternatives that will be reviewed tonight, so we are here. Um, This whole month, we are doing our community outreach and receiving feedback from PPAC and CPC. And based on the direction we received tonight, we will be developing preferred alternative and cost estimates. And early next year, we'll be back with back in front of the community and to be packed at CTC with the preferred alternative to receive their feedback. Based on their feedback, we'll be developing final and draft and final plan for this study for city council approval in April and May next year. Um, to for project gold, background and ongoing projects. Um, the goal of the project is to explore ways to enhance safety, incorporate green streak elements, and improve multimodal access for people, walking, biking, using public transit, and driving along Wingstorm Avenue, and to identify a preferred alternative and develop preliminary concept drawings and customers for the preferred culture. For the study background, this study, but this area was highlighted, envision 0 action plan as the priority number one. This is also part of multiple safe for us to school, including Los Altos High, Monteloma, as well as mistrial, and. There are 2 ongoing projects along their corridor. 1st one is Raystrop Avenue, Great Separation, which will lower Raystrop Avenue and Central Expressway intersection, add a bike and pedestrian bridge to maintain East West connection between Leland and Pistachio Avenue, and will include bumper bike lanes, along with Star, within project limits, with wide chalk block, and pedestrian refuge island. The 2nd project is rainstraw and Junction, which will include installing pedestrian, Iberg Beacon, with high disability crosswalk, and advanced morning stylage, with signal street lighting. Uh, for the existing conditions, uh, we, uh, gather data on a traffic volume, traffic count, speed, collisions, parking, transit ridership as well as did field observation. Um sorry. Uh, rainstorm is a 35 mile per hour, uh, road with 4 travel lanes with on street parking. It also has on-street bike lanes known as pots too. It has diverse land use with long coughing between intersections with VTA, multiple trans grounds, including VTA. Um, For this study, we have done a traffic collision from 2020 to 2025. Um, all for all cash crash types. There were 72 collisions with 21 being bicycle and pedestrian involved. The 2 the intersections with the highest pollutions include Central Expressway, Middlefield, Rock Street, and. For traffic operations. The intersection congestion, it is determined by level of service, but behaving, no traffic, and ENCAP, traffic congestion, for this corridor, vehicle congestion is highest, and intersection of California and Central Expressway, with moderate traffic along Montecito and Middlefield. Average traffic volume. is number of cars on a restore for a 12 hour, or 24 hour period. The highest average daily traffic is approximately 16000 between colony and wine pot. To look a little deeper, we also looked at this 24 hour period, it shows the morning peak between 8 to 10 and the afternoon peak between 4 to 6 and a steep steep decline in traffic starting 6 p.m. Looking at speeding along rate stores, speeding speed exceeds the positive speed limit by 4 to 6 miles between Montevito and Jane Lane. We also have died on street parking analysis. There are 253 art state parking, parking is allowed on 40% of corridor, limited on street parking, uh, during uh, on south of Central Expressway. And high parking utilization between San Luis and Junction and between old Middlefield and Y. Newstrop Avenue is served by multiple transit corridor, transit lines, including VTA, Mountain View, Community Shuttle, and NBO. The top locations are, rainstorm at Middlefield, and rainstorm at Lakeport. So to summarize, this corridor has diverse land use, including community center, parks, residential, commercial, and schools. It has limited right of way. Multiple severe collision along range, including drivers, bikers, and pedestrians. It's a multimodal corridor with bike lane transit stop, the vehicle access, from EC from El Camino to 101. It's heavy traffic during commute hour and speeding during that commute. Um, we have completed the 1st round of outreach that identified including 8 points along rainstorm and improvement ideas. For this 1st round of outreach, we had a community wide online survey. We did a walk in 54 school pop-up at Monte Loma, and notifications were sent through yard signs, postcards, email blasts, and social media. For the survey that was open from February 1st to March 2nd, we received 1000 responses, and survey responders could choose multiple options, so some of them will not add up 200. It'll be more than that. So the question on which of the following best describes why you traveled on a range sport, 71% indicated they live on or near rainstorm, and 61% indicated they travel for shopping, dining, medical appointments, and other parents. On question and how do you travel on ring store of 90% identified as drivers, but as we look closely to the data, we also bounce, many of them also walk by orcade transit. 80% reported, they do not park underway. Which of the following challenges do you experience on ringstroke on this question, traffic congestion was the highest, followed by speeding, difficulty crossing the conflicts with drivers and cyclists and pedestrians? Which of these safety improvements would be most meaningful on range of Avenue? The responses include safer intersection crossing, protected or improved in flight lane. Slow down drivers, greenery, improved sidewalk, credit, street lighting, and new mid block crossing. We also held a walking bike tour where 15 community members attended, staffed walk, and fight with them along, corridor to identify existing issues and potential improvements, the desire improvements being consistent by clean width, safer costing, and sexual expressway, additional mid-block crossing, and better enforcement for vehicle blocking bikes. So, uh, reach around one, what we heard was that improved safety at intersections causing. provide safer and more comfortable bicycle facilities. Video travel speed. Add greenery and landscaping, maintain reasonable vehicle circulation, and consider parking. Rainstore has limited right of way, requiring trade-off. Um, which, uh, we, which we all took into account as we develop these draft alternatives. So tonight we have the 3 alternative to seek your attraction. Alternative, A, is improved by the, the improved byte facility and C improved pedestrian facility with breeding. Each alternative maintains the existing travel lanes while emphasizing different portal priorities. Concepts that were considered but not advanced. Um, so 1st one was road diet, which would reduce travel laid north of sexual expressway. Restrop avenue provides a major vehicle access to El Camino if you were just one on one maps. Um, in our server response as well as throughout community outreach for round one, we found that traffic congestion was their top priority. Existing congestion at California Street, Central Expressway, and moderate traffic congestion, and Jade Montecito, old middle field, and middle field. Indicated we already have congestion on rainstorm. Initial analysis showed that road diet would worsen this congestion, especially at 2 intersection, including old middle field way, and Moxedo. The 2nd alternate, the 2nd concept that we considered, but not advance, it's 2 ways that goes back, which creates a complexity around driveway, as well as an interception. It could be only accommodated on one side of the street, so bikers have to cross the street to access it on the other side. It would also require greater approval and coordination. With Caltrain, County Caltrain. So for the 1st alternative A, the cross sections that are shown here will remain as remain the same as existing. It will improve at specific intersections. Um, so it will include 2 new midblog crossing, one at one dot and one uh, uh, near Walthrop School of Peninsula, and that could be with RRMB or PC that could be determined, but these are the 2 locations that have identified. It would also include improving intersection. These are example pictures, but it could include enhanced bus walks, curb extensions, AD compliant programs, green bike markings through the intersection, protected intersection elements where feasible. Alternative B, which is a bike focused alternative. That includes, that is, primarily north of Central Expressway by converting one side of the road of cooking to separate bike lane, to, uh, to separate bike lane and traveling. So you can see we have added, a planting strip and a 3 foot buffer on the top, uh, to provide that separation. Along the corridor, it will zigzag because of the, uh, because we have limited right of way and we're keeping the, uh, keeping the travel lakes as well as some of the parking along the corridor. So it will have some protected parking protected bike glaze such as on Castro and California. It will also have buffered bike lane, which has a bike lane and there's like a little bit of space on the side to provide that separation. And up. I also had the protected bike wave. Um, for alternative C, it's an improved pedestrian facility. Um, that has uh, wider sidewalk and greenery and added buffer for bite lanes. And this is the north part of um, the corridor. This one has 3 bulb outs between the parking to provide green. As well as um, continuous sidewalk of 6 feet with added greenery. And buffered bike lane where it's possible. So to the show the comparison among the pre-alternatives. All alternatives will include uh, intersection improvements as well as mid-block processing. Protected bike facility would be greater for alternative, with separated bike clean and increased buffer, and it will have some increased buffer for alternative C. For wider sidewalk, alternative C will have a widening sidewalk to 6 feet. Additional greening, alternative, you will have some landscaping, but alternatively, you will have more greening, including, tree whales, landscaping, buy and buy retention. For ultra the B and C, there will be parking impact, approximately 60% of the bill, to provide the bite buffers. And all the alternatives will result in various ranges of speed reduction, given per full bouts, uh, bin block crossing, protected bicycling, to calm the traveling speed of today. So upreach round 2 feedback, uh, As we are currently doing. So currently we are doing our community outreach on the corridor priorities as well as draft concept alternate. Currently we have a survey open, which will be closed on September 11th. Here's the QR code to take our survey. I received feedback from VPAC on August 15th, we had a premier movie, not Monday, and we are here tonight to see your direction. Um, so BPAC reviewed this, um, 18th and supported alternative A, with the following comments, considering speed cables, protected intersection elements and right turn on red. Support alternative B, with the following comments to explore opportunities to provide added bike planes, and buy buffers, and explore ways to improve biking by narrowing traveling, to provide wider bikeway painted buffer, or raised bikeway path, adjacent to rain star park. Regarding alternative C, supported additional landscaping with targeted improvements to address construction on the sidewalk. We have feedback also included, recognized that due to corridor constraint and high, uh, traffic volume. A road diet is highly invisible is likely infeasible. Restriving existing bike lane to improve its ability for bicyclists and roadway users. Explore if croissanto avenue could be close to vehicles in advance, upgrade separation project. Explore if active transportation improvement at El Camino and rainstock could be part of this plan. And consider implementing in phases, with intersection improvement, being prioritized or linear. Yes. We also had a well attended community meeting last Monday, which had 50 community members at the meeting. Um, it was, um, uh, in the meeting, uh, notification was also featured in Mountain Her voice. Um, we heard a very diverse set of, um, experiences and priorities throughout eating. Uh, we heard that for border priorities, to improve safety for students traveling to Los Altos high school, provide protected bike planes, uh, reduce vehicle speed, and maintain travel lates at all street. But draft alternative, we had um, a very high level. Dot exercise to understand where people were cleaning. Uh, alternately, we had support for alternative A, which is for mid-block processing and intersection improvements, alternative fees, or protected bike lanes, and requested additional protection south of Sexual Expressway, and support board, weinerate the alternate fee. Um, tonight, I also have some initial survey results. A survey will be closed on September 11th. Um, so this is our 1st initial snapshot of the survey, the results might may change from here until when the survey closes. But I wanted to share some of the high level takeaways as we are looking at right now. So primary responses shows that approximately 60% live on or within block of Rainstorm Avenue. 80% traveled on rainstorm to run errands or go to the appointments, 90% drive, 90% drive, but we also have 25 to 30% who also buy again bought the log avenue to show rainstorm is a multiple corridors. On corridor priorities by preference, what we are seeing is to maintain vehicle travel time and on-street parking. Improving intersection and protected bike lane with greenery. The survey so far has about 1400 responses. And on the question of what is your preferred alternative between among the 3? We see alternative A being the highest of 29%, followed by alternative B, 26%, alternative C, 23%, maintaining existing condition, 13%, not listed 2%, and other 7%. Looking at the other option, many have adjusted to provide or bike protection and to provide and to combine B and C together as one option. So, in reality, in our full analysis, alternate B and C will come. So for the next step and discussion question. So we are here tonight, uh, to receive your direction on the draft concept alternatives based on the direction, will be developing the preferred alternative with the cost estimate, and we'll be back early next year to take your feedback, and based on your feedback, we'll develop a final report for counseling option uh,

[00:26:50] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: April or May next year.

[00:26:53] Transportation Planner Ahmed: So for tonight, direction on the quarter priorities include protected biking, additional midblock profit, improved intersection, greenery, maintain on street parking, and vehicle travel times, and slow or calm vehicle speed. Ringstore has a limited ride of way and has demand from multiple nodes into four dollars. So we are seeking direct from CBC on how to prioritize these priorities to further develop that process to identify for an alternative. And provide direction on the 3 alternative that we have. Either the 3, the combination of 3 or a long, um, recommendation. So with that, My presentation. Very much. Okay,

[00:27:40] Chair Alison Hicks: so for those of you just arrived. Um, uh, under, uh, Council member McAllister's request, we're switching, uh, the order of the agenda and we're going to receive public comment on this item before we do the council questions of the question we're going to see how that goes. Um, I have also had speaking of requests. I've also had a request that, um, since this interfaces with transportation to him from Los Altos high school, that any students who may be here, who may be wanting to speak, be able to speak first. So if they're any students, so that they can go home apparently and do their homework, is that I got? There may be no students here in person. Are there any students here in person who want teachers or here? Their teachers? Yeah, they may be on zoo, but we'll start with. Okay. I'm seeing no students who want to go home and do homework at least. Um, so we'll just take uh, um, in-person speakers and the order that they come. Hi.

[00:28:45] Public Speaker: Thank you so much, all, for what you do. It's very, it's a lot of work. I appreciate your efforts. Endeavor travel off. I've been the neighborhood watch captain on Windstor for 31 years. So I know every infrastructure on the one they call, I interface with the city of public works. are awesome. So from the water main blowing last October to gas lines to anything. So I have investigated both north and south. There are 2 different animals, 2 different knees. North main store is pristine, wide streets, wide bicycle lane, 5.5 lane, wide. Um, we have uh, very little pedestrian because people do not take a leisurely walk on wing store when there's 4 wings of traffic. They use rainstorm as a point A to point B. Same thing as true, like foul. Now, North Wing Store. We had lots of green and we recreated it over 30 years ago because of the security for our front yards, the noise from the street and the buses, and fumes. So we've already done the greenery part of it, and and reviewing all of these options, and I looked at all of them very, very strongly. Um, most of us believe that plant C is a replica of California Street, which everything green there is dead. Um, the other option and the other issue is that our sidewalks, we have underneath our public parking, our street parking and sidewalks, our water line or sewer line. Our utilities have to get to those things, clean them out. Um, the main goal for those on North Windsor. We want to keep our on street parking, so it helps our disabilities, our elderly, our nursery school, our auto repair has an overrun of automobiles using the next door, um, North, uh. Uh, North is Queen. We need great visibility. The main thing with choosing whatever it is you choose is that we need to look at real time. Pouring Ring Store if was in trouble in 2015, the last 3 years, it's very quiet. North ring store has no combustion of traffic, just a 4 minute wait at the intersection. Unfortunately, South Wingsthorpe is packed. It's only 3.5 blocks. North is 10. Uh, south has all the traffic from California and El Camino. It's bumper to bumper. It has narrow bicycle lanes. We have on the ring store park side of south, New York. No park. Across the street is a sign that says between 8 AM to 10 PM. You have 5 hours, you can park there. Cars parked there for days on end. So I highly recommend on South Springs, so all the on street parking go away. Increase the bicycle lanes to 5.5 for our people. Um, Southminster has a lot of pedestrian and bicycle because of 3 points of interest, rings or park, the plaza, uh, grocery and 5 guys. So it really helps the bicyclist there. Um, on north and south for a bicyclist. I recommend below protective, um, Markers that are on the bicycle painted lane, it's 6 inches wide, 3 inches high. It's great. North Wing store for bicyclists. I've been monitoring a video since last March. We have 6 to 10 per day on both sides because our bicycles prefer side treats. Side streets, the shortcut on Permanente Creek, under the 101 to Google. Uh, I asked them, if, if reinstruct, it's fancy with bicycle angels, you use it, they say no. I said, are you afraid of the cars? They said, no, we can see the cars. We got great visibility. Great with what we don't want is we don't want to wear the signals. And we don't want the costumes and the mailman truck fumes and our delivery trucks. So Northland. So. Oh,

[00:32:29] Chair Alison Hicks: is it over? I had no idea. I know. There was no doubt.

[00:32:34] Valerie Fenwick: Hi there, Valerie Fennick. I am speaking on my own behavior, perhaps, not for my employer nor for the performing arts committee here in Mountain View. I have lived in the neighborhood for almost 30 years. I have lived on Montecito. I've no, I've never experienced talking about that traffic. Um, I use Bonacito almost every day either by buying or by car. Um, and I lived on Montecito for 5 years. So, um, that's confusing. I use Rangsorf in order to get to Sunnyvale, Redwood City, Palo Alto, and Menlo Park as well as Central Expressway. I agree with the points that were raised by Sarah Grante and his email, as well as I just own the phrase blog post. Um, the level of service. I'm surprised we're so focused on that number. It seems very outdated model. But I really do appreciate, uh, you taking comments after the presentation, then makes us all more prepared. Um, we really do need a left turn arrow at um, for north and southbound traffic on Raysorp at Jane Montecito. I have seen some many horrific accidents there at the fire station, which is convenient location with the firefighters, but still really horrific things. Um, and uh, that, What happens, we get a lot of conflicts with pedestrians. I see people walking their kids and strollers and bikes because people are trying to make the unprotected left turn onto Montecito. Um, and, uh, not wanting to wait for pedestrians that are coming. I, uh, driving ring surf on Saturday and saw a group of about 40 bicyclists on middle field going, um, uh, westbound on that road and there was uh, 3 uh, 2 bicyclists traveling southbound along with me on ring store. Uh, so, and that was 2 minutes uh, that I was there. I'm like, I drive that road every day. I live in the neighborhood. Um, I would recommend for all of these, that council and the transportation committee, focus on kind of the middle areas, particularly great to hear about junction. That's a route to school. And people do not stop there. I've been almost rear ended when I stopped for pedestrians at junction. I bring surf injunction. So I really appreciate you focusing like on the middle. We've got this big, big grade separation project coming. We've heard that as we get nearer to one on one that, People are less likely to cycle, there's fewer things to cycle too. Um, but the, the Safeway around the middle field and brainstorp and the taco trucks and uh, the restaurants and things there are very popular attractions. So folks on the middle, um, consider, um, raised sidewalks, uh, remove the pinch points on the, raised crosswalks, remove the pinch points on the sidewalk. It's very difficult for people with strollers and wheelchairs and other mobility devices. And uh, yeah, that's it. Thank you very much.

[00:35:23] Chair Alison Hicks: Other in-person speakers?

[00:35:28] Valerie Fenwick: Line up. It goes faster.

[00:35:34] Kimball Smith: I won't say much, uh, you know. We did try to do a bike lane. I saw it on the website for late. And We did California instead of late. Wait them all you need to do is pay them. That's where most people ride. Uh, people aboard the streets that were boring. Now California is narrow. right there sometimes. It's okay for me, but I don't see a lot of students right at the school. On ring store, if I've ridden that pool, and she's right, it's very bad between California. And the recreation center, because of bike lance like this one. So, those improvements are getting really, you know, the parking will help. As far as farther down. All you have to do is move the cars in, shift the bike lane on the other side. protect the bikes. Then you do the roll up sidewalk. 45 degree angle or something round. So you can dodge out of the car dealers if some, if the passengers open the door. But you don't have to be very advanced. You'll have to make it more narrow to achieve these. And all of this probably should go, you know, you may be able to get it in before the grade separation. Bring store for El Camino, just try, uh, stop all the traffic. People and the bikes go without the cars, you know, stop the cars in all directions, and that would make that safe. Thanks.

[00:37:03] Chair Alison Hicks: We have your name also. Kimball Smith. Smith. And I, I didn't ask if are there blue cards for people to make out tonight? I see any blue. Okay, then just tell us your name before you speak. Welcome

[00:37:21] Alexam Rosso: me. I be brief. Uh, Alexam Rosso. Um, I just wanted to rise and show support for the uh, option B, especially with the uh, alternative C elements there, because I'll never say no to um, order greenery that adds to our biodiversity as to our, um, our, uh, oxygen, health and also, right? So, you guys this. Also, especially since, like, I saw, especially when you're talking about, like, the conversation about things, now, that this widens up, uh, walkability with our crosswalks, and that's another reason why I love it here now, whether we're downtown or off the alternate real, having that widened space for people to walk and to get through corridors. It's fantastic. And I would actually invite the community and consider. Other, um, I like areas of this project when it comes to. Alternatives to driving with 4 doors when it comes to new housing development. It's something I've seen with my neighborhood still. At the very end, we're building those new single-family homes over there and there's been a lot of conversation with my neighbors when it comes to, how is that going to, interact with traffic. So, I would ask for the committee to really consider, how are we going to manage new traffic and new areas where, there's gonna be a lot of stop gaps with currently existing roads that's gonna, you know, a lot of, like they'll stop backs on that. So, and how we could, we gave without this new plan and how that would mediate with. Um, Adele and go in that direction.

[00:38:52] Public Works Director Ng: verification. Did you say option B, which is um, bike focus or option C, which is more pedestrian and greenery?

[00:39:00] Alexam Rosso: So, how I understood it was like an option B was that the bike focus, but then there was like an empty was flattering out with option C as well. So I would definitely lean more towards option C. If you're going to choose one or the other, but if you're able to combine DNC, then that'd be, that's above. Nice. Thank you

[00:39:28] Christine: My name is Christine. You're like my last night too, that's Hillcock. Anthony Copolis. Um, good evening. Uh, I've been a resident of Mountain View for 25 years in the Castro neighborhood. And um, I ride to work. I work at Los Altos High School. Um, and so my, uh, my, uh, not argument, but my, uh, the reason I'm here is bec- based on observation on basic data. I don't see enough of our youth riding to school. Um, I see many uh, dangerous pockets along the way to uh, to a Camino, there are no shortcuts. The only way to get there. Um, one thing I wanted to bring to your attention is the fact that we share the road with big buses. Check buses. Tech transportation buses, not just city buses, or the shuttle, but the big buses that are chartered to bring their employees to work. And a lot of construction trucks. And um, Although I ride and I feel fine about it. I don't think a lot of the youth or the parents let the youth to buy to school. Um, So, with that in mind, I feel like the bike lanes have to be somehow protected. Somehow, somehow we have to avoid near misses between the bikers and uh, the big vehicles riding on the road. Um, I, I love Mountain View. I love living here. I'm a proud resident of Mountain View. I love working where I work. Um, I want to see safety for all. I want to see more riders coming out there and going to school and going to work and going to get their groceries and everything. I just want us to move forward as a city and um, make it safe for all of us. Um. That's basically it, thank you so much. question for you. Jeremy. How

[00:41:30] Committee Member John McAlister: are the kids using those e-bikes? Are they gonna ditch the bicycle and do you use more 8 bikes? DC a lot more kids. I mean, e-bikes go in the sky.

[00:41:38] Public Speaker: I cannot speak to. I can speak to the fact that, um, There, I, if the protections are being made for the writers, I feel more of them will be on there now, whether there will be on e-bikes or not. I can't say, I can't speak to that. But I would like them to be safe, whatever they write. Thank you. Thank you. Next

[00:42:00] Chair Alison Hicks: in-person speaker and do tell us your name. Good

[00:42:05] Mary Dateo: evening, Mary Gabio. Um, I just, uh, was looking at the, uh, fake route to school maps and, um, ringstorp is part of the same route to school to, um, To Los Altos High School, and it's also on the Castro School, uh, route to school, and in both cases, at least, uh, part of that is. South of the, it's between the, uh, race park and, um, I took the community tour the day they did it, and that's the section I was on, and, um, uh, city employee and I were, who were on that, as we headed back toward, um, from El Camino back toward the park where, very startled when the bike lane totally disappeared. Um, at an intersection, um, and just as one of those big buses, um, somebody was talking about went by, so that was extremely scary. Um, I don't know how I could ask my, you know, I ever think about if I had kids asking them to ride that to a school, but we did see a bunch of students heading toward the high school that day. So, I, I, We'll have to see more people on, on bike, but we have to make it safe. So I think, um, My, I think, I think really the, the top concern here needs to be safety, especially for kids and really for anybody else that's going to use that intersection. There's going to be more and more people around there with all the apartments going in. Um, so I think, uh, At, at the minimum, there needs to be a, a continuous bike lane, which we don't even have that right now. So, um, thank you. Thank you. And

[00:43:56] Chair Alison Hicks: again, tell us the name. Speak on a blue card. Good evening.

[00:43:59] Terry Barton: My name's Terry Barton. I'm a member of the VPAC, I'm speaking as individual. So 1st my qualifications. I've commuted every day, the full length of ring store for 13 years, for El Camino, to Garcia, haven't been to North Bay Shore. So my trip counts over 6000 trips. On Friday afternoon. I went out to try to get some high schoolers to come. I'd talk to you about dinner 12 out of 25 or 30 to 5 as I was waiting. They said it's not something new. You're not comfortable speaking. So they are out there riding. And someone would kind of think when I said, well, what would you? how would you feel if you didn't speak and one of your classmates was killed? Uh in the future? Because You can see it's unsafe. You can see the bike lane disappears here crossing central or cross. Uh, at a couple other points, and you can see it's a one foot line, like, I mean, you've heard, and you can see buses going by. So they know it's dangerous. It just... Uh, in terms of, uh, the key point I'd like to raise is you're going to see the, um, Like a transportation plan shortly, and I don't know if the notes captured, but I had motionably tried to include more processes. More standards, more best practices as, uh, what, uh, should be considered the act of transportation. It did a lot, but that motion didn't carry. So what you see is things like this, uh, intersection, it brings Starfell, El Camino, where there's only crosswalk on one side. Nobody, there's no policy in the city that we should encourage pedestrians walking and ask for crosswalks on both sides of all intersections. So, the staff felt it was up to you to use your judgment to call for what you want. If you want cross walks on all sides of an intersection, you want people to cross from both sides of El Camino, so they're not riding on the wrong side of the road or walking jaywalking, as it used to be called across the intersection, you need to demand that. If you want bike lanes that are standard and the standard for the National Association of city transportation, uh, professionals is 14.5 feet with parking. There's no place on ring store that it currently meets that standard. There are bike lanes painted and they're 3 feet wide. Uh, if that is some location. So it doesn't meet any current standards, uh, for recommended parking or for bike lanes in many locations. So it is definitely unsafe. People don't ride it. I suspect that none of you have ridden it more than once or twice in the last year. And you can experience right now. There's a boat parked sticking out at 847 ring sourcemen. there for 5 weeks. I, you know, it's 2 feet away from the curb. It creates a hazard, no one. 5 bike lane. So, It's up to you to make your decision to recommend safety or not, because standards aren't currently being adopted, and I ask you to consider the students and the people that don't currently use it, but would like to. I can't.

[00:46:55] Chair Alison Hicks: And a reminder, your name?

[00:46:58] Kian Shin: Yeah, of course. My name is Kian Shin. Very recently, I did a project on El Camino's new bike lanes. I, um, I did a study on the, uh, specifically the crossing at rankstorf over to distal, and I had realized how, yes, we've completed the, you know, part. Now looking at it, the Rangstorff piece was far from safe. Knowing that is, I have a fair amount of, kind of record of how, how many people are using it every day, like not just students, but like people are commuting to work and people are going to the shuttle there. I do feel like it should be important, that people are coming up from ranksdorf as well. So I think that is, it's just vital of an area. As well. Also, I think it adds, well, that the buses should be separated, because my dad who lived in Dublin for 25 years had to bike on a lane shared with the bus and he remembered how scary that is. And we kind of have that at El Camino now. Maybe that's a question if we sometimes separating the better idea. You know, separating 2 modes of transit, they're 2 ones much faster and also much heavier. So, you know. One hits the other, we know who's going to get a lot more hurt. But, really, you know, like, I had to note, like, You don't have to start.

[00:48:20] Chair Alison Hicks: If you don't have another minute, 40 seconds of constant. Thank you very much.

[00:48:25] Kian Shin: I want to say about the extra. But note that it is popular and it has a fair amount of bikes both in the morning and afternoon. That's just what I add. I realized.

[00:48:35] Chair Alison Hicks: Thank you, guys. Sure. Sure.

[00:48:40] Serge Bonte: So my name is Selgebones. Uh, I'm a member of EPAC, but I had to reduce myself during the deliberation. I was starting to provide comments at myself cell phones. Um, and that's what I think about here. So I send you some, some, Kind of lengthy, uh, perments, and you don't have time to repeat this, even if I spoke in French. Um, I, um, I wanted to, to, uh, 1st uh, congratulated stuff on, on the quality of the, the existing foundation, that's a very detailed, uh, things we are, 2 things that I, I think one thing I think what's missing for context is we, um, are free absoning, that's coming up. Um, uh, you should look at the map of your period of the name. It's calling from much greater density, I guess, uh, don't suffering stuff. And also increase density on North Franks, but only on one side of it. So it's going to be suburbia meets a city and I think it's a challenge to have a treatment that works for a suburban style on one side of rank stuff and a city, more city life. So, and I think it's somewhat relevant because it's not crummy. And the transit and densities are pretty high. They are pretty high urban, but proposed in downtown, which has its own precise plans or even buffets. Which has its own plant. Um, But, yeah, I can see as a challenge to do this. Um, the other thing too, and and I'm not sure if you had done some murdering for a great separation project. But I suspect that the traffic, uh, patterns will change quite a bit once we have great separation. I know I live on, on, on, on the other side of our, you know, and I, I avoid uh, rings of, like the plague, because I, It's stressful to cross the tracks. And it's also always congested and some types, minutes and, you know, and minutes at the time. I suspect that once you have great separation, you'll see much more traffic. Throwing through prank stuff and I think it's something to to keep in mind. Um, and then very briefly, um, there was a suggestions to to close presento. Um, ahead of the great separation, I think that should be done ASAP maybe by the end of the year. Um, 1st of all, that's going to happen with a great separation, but I think it would provide some immediate relief to um, people on, on, on foot. You know, you have one less intersection and crosswork to deal with on bikes because you won't have to worry about, you know, people are trying to sneak in there. And even for, for, uh, motorists because, you know, You, you, essentially, you're going to remove one diet, uh, there, and you won't have to deal with conflicts with people again, from present to trying to do. Thank you. You. More

[00:51:50] Chair Alison Hicks: in person speakers?

[00:51:54] Caroline Horn: Hi, I'm Caroline Horn and I'm a resident of Los Altos, but I work with a parents group. Um, at Los Altos High School. We try to encourage our students to use ABC, anything but a car. Um, and about half of our students do live in Mountain Canoe, you know. Um. But, you know, so often the barrier for many of them is safety. The parents don't think it's safe for them to bite on their own. And it's only about, our school district is not huge. It's not 8 miles through the snow. It's a couple of miles. It's maybe 3 miles at the most on the most northern end of Frank Store. Um, and that's about 15 or 20 minute bike ride, and it's actually so much faster than driving, especially when, uh, in high traffic time. And I know this because I buy 6 miles to work. Um, every day and rain or sign. It's just fine Um, also as housing density increases. We need to encourage micro mobility. Um, I'm seeing more and more uh, people with families. I see more and more families with cargo bikes nowadays. It's been a really huge uppick in that. And I think we're only going to see more and more of it, and that's what we want. Because, you know, it's much less, uh, congestion, it's better for the air, it's better pollution, you know, for pollution, everything like, you know, like that. And we really need to be encouraging micro mobility and I feel like options B and C if we can combine them. That would be great. Um, right now, I'm not loving either of them, and so that's probably, I think that's why you may not be seeing like a wholehearted agreement on smaller groups on each one of these options in a way. Thank you very much. Thank you. Um,

[00:53:37] Tracy Q: my name is Tracy Q. Um, I live in the Shoreline West neighborhood and I walk and bike around um, the neighborhood a lot to Bryce Park, to downtown and everything. Um, my office is actually uh, where I have to go 3 days a week is actually um, near Crittenden on Terabello. And so it's a prime area to, like, bike to Frank Storf. I also go to the midwife of the baker like once or twice a week. Uh, but, uh, which is also a great place to buy, but I never really consider it because I feel very uncomfortable. I feel it's a very hostile route to go down shoreline and there aren't really other options there. Um, so I I definitely feel scared by, you know, being kept in by the parking on one side and then the buses, right? They are coming. You know, usually I'm seeing the ETA buses. I feel a lot of insecurity there. And then, um, also just, generally speaking, I feel just, um, the feeling I get, we talk a lot about like the direct, um, safety impacts of, of, you know, protection and, you know, wider sidewalks and things like that. But I think that there, there's like an indirect, um, feeling I get when I'm on rain surf, which is, it looks like a forgotten quarter. It doesn't, it does feel like everybody who's using that street is just thinking about their point. They're not using the street mindfully at all, and that makes me feel very scared, actually. That is one of the reasons that suppress my, my usable streak. So I do think, because I live half a block off California Street, and I know there are a lot of opinions on that, but as a primary walker, I feel tons safer, a ton safer. I feel, um, the, the, the infrastructure is very deliberate designed, you know, I feel much safer. I don't know the what the traffic state will show, but anecdotally, I feel like the traffic is much calmer, much slower. I feel much safer walking and biking along that quarter, and I think that whatever option, I'm great. very glad to hear that, we're going to combine elements of B and C into another option. Um, but I would feel, um, I feel that the, um, example of a more deliberate, um, sort of design for the street, um, will really have a lot of indirect and hopefully that will, um, show through in the data. Uh, but I for sure would um, probably be more encouraged to bike, to that really cool corner, right, on ranks on, um, you know, middle field with, you know, the Safeway and the Starbucks and, you know, all those things and um, maybe even get down to Heritage Park, which, which I feel like, you know, I would like to explore more parks in the city. So, um, so yeah, that's my, those are my thoughts. Thank you. Thank you.

[00:56:12] April Webster: Hi, April Webster, I'm the bike walk, uh, Mountain View, Lost Alto's team leader, at least one of them. Um, I want to start up all. I'll just repeat what Tracy said about California. Um, I've walked along a bites. I drive most of the time, but it actually feels a little more comfortable for me even as a driver. I'm just a lot less hectic and it feels like a neighborhood street. There are a lot more people walking out. Um, But for this particular item, I want to start by highlighting a joint community letter that was submitted by MVCSP. Green Spaces Mountain View, the Santa Clara Bird Alliance, and Bike Walk, and the LA. And the number of community members as well. And so I'm just going to read that out and paraphrase a little bit. Um, we would like to ask, um, the CTC to pass a motion that directs staff to use this next space of the ranks Dorf study to evaluate, to develop and evaluate a full green complete streets project. Um, that's one that integrates both the safety concepts that you saw in A and D with the intersections and the protected bike lanes. And also the green infrastructure structure elements. Um, and in particular, um, it's going to elaborate a little bit more. Um, we want one to develop a full concept design that integrates continuous protected bicycle lanes, the protected intersections, All 4 of the mid-block crossings with pedestrian hybrid beacons, which are a bit safer. Um, and then also with street trees, regionally native and biodiversity supportive planting, designed as functioning habitat, and functional green, um, green storm water infrastructure. Second, we would like to ask you to do the design work that's needed to determine how that can fit in. We want you to be creative and look where you can find extra space. Um, so test 10 foot inner lanes. We understand that the outer lanes will be used by buses and larger trucks and um, the large um, tech buses. This is pretty typical to you, the outer lanes for those purposes and then inner lanes to be much narrower, like what has been done on El Camino rail by Caltran. Um, we also want you to explore reallocation of the 14 foot median. Um, which is, it seems to be non-functional, um, land and could be moved to the outside and used to protect people or, um, space for green infrastructure. And then also the city controlled land, additional parking reconv- configuration or removal. And then bring that full concept back to the CTC on the community and the B pack so that they have the ability to understand what's happened, look at the costs that are associated with these different ones, benefits, trade-offs, et cetera. And I just want to say rank store, visit cities, highest priority vision throw, um, project. That means it's one of, it's the most dangerous one. And it's also our 1st green complete streets project. So this is really an important test for the city to get this right. Thank you so much. Yep, good time. Yes,

[00:59:16] Jennifer Sumach: some steak. Jennifer Sumach. Um, I wasn't going to talk a bit since you asked about e-bikes, um, as an e-bikes. I just wanted to speak up. Um, so there's different types of e-bikes. Some are just mini motorbikes. They go really fast and they're sort of scary. I personally use a pedal assist. Um, and I, um, it will, like, I want a little exercise. I keep it on low, um, and it also keeps my speed reasonable. Um, uh, what I've found is that, um, you know, it's perfect for California Street. If you want to go really fast on the protected cycling. Um, then, uh, you know, people get really frustrated because the like, the protected lane is narrow. So like bikers who want to go pretty fast don't really like it that much. I really like it because I, you know, I just use the pedal assist. Um, my daughter just graduated from Los Altos High School, so looking at their parking situation in terms of the bike, uh, racks, which are really full. Um, you know, I'd say there are, you know, quite a few, but it's not the majority in terms of e-bikes and it's definitely more of those pedal assis that I see that I see there. So I think a protected bike lane is really what I would propose. For Renkstorff. Um, my son is in 5th grade. We have a bunch of friends. There's like a lot, a big housing element now on that north rank store area. Um, and uh, that street is just scary. I worry about those kids getting just. Um, so that's my. Very much.

[01:00:45] Chair Alison Hicks: More in-person speakers. Okay.

[01:00:51] Dr. Tracy Farita: Like, prepare how much he did receive a letter. I'm Dr. Tracy Farita. I'm worth Los Altos High School sustainability team, um, and Green Spaces Mound. Um, So my main commissar, you know, I did want to see it on complete streets kind of program, and I'm kind of new to complete streets, but the whole idea, so I can't use all the terms and all the presents acronyms. But, as one person said, it's kind of like an empty corridor or, uh, unwanted cord or. We really need to improve the whole street. I didn't really like the way the survey was, which I did take. I do live with her, I do use her. Um, it's like, option B for bike, and it, bold, it's like, 60% of parking will be gone. I don't think we should be pitting. Teen bicycle riders against people, seniors, and stuff would be, uh, parking. I, I, I would like to see that we think about the street as a whole. And that we, you know, maybe we can't do everything. We shouldn't be choosing one. And then if I, If I think about, Children going to school, my grandson, I went to LAHS. Just graduated. He, um, he tried for the 1st week to go to school on bike. It's a 3 mile bike ride. You have to go up. There's really no other. And yeah, several incidents, like 3 different incidents within the week, and that was it. So the rest of the time I had to drive him to school. And it's terribly crowded car heat congestion, going through that intersection with the train in the morning, etc. So, I would like to be able to ride on Riksdorf, and I do have it. Make some difference. I don't know, but, um, It's just, I do sometimes do my shopping, but, Pretty dangerous. I do go the other way down permanente if I can, but you can't do that going up to like Target or, you know, all those shopping centers or the high school. Um. So like there's something else. El Camino. I'd really like to see the city work across cities. Um, we kind of let some of these intersections where we're across cities, I feel like we let them go. Super dangerous. All our kids are crossing there. I heard some ideas that were simple. Um, I think LA just is, I think we put some to this, uh, committee, one of these committees, uh, about, uh, Poseo. But, uh, I think we really need to be working there as well, so that everybody is safe. And I worry as we go through S, with SP 79, We start building more and more housing. I want that for our people. But we have to be thinking about how we're going to get back safely to work in school. Thank you.

[01:04:28] Chair Alison Hicks: Are there more in-person speakers? Um,

[01:04:32] Derek Mihara: I'm Derek Mihara, assistant principal at Althos High School. And um, my responsibilities include bicycles and parking. So what Los Altos did was they decided the city, um, decided to try to restrict parking, uh, encourage people to do biking. Um, said, hey, you know, we don't use much parking if uh, people uh, bike to school. Um, however, Los Altos work with Mountain View in order to make that happen because a lot of our bicyclists are coming from a mountain. We have 100s of students, biking from Mountain View. Many of the biking through, If not the majority of the biking through, ranksdorf. Um, and it is, it is a dangerous uh, proposition for for them. So I'm here just to talk for them, speak for them, uh, to say that for those students who are doing what we ask, really kind of what we ask them to do. Um, what we were telling them to, what we're hoping that they'll do, um, that will make it a safe, uh, uh, experience as we possibly can. I'm not good with the specifics. I'm not a traffic person, but I do know that there are folks out there, many students out there, um, who have a harrowing, uh, ride to school in the morning, uh, and a heroin ride back, uh, in the year. So, I'm going to speak on their behalf. So thank you.

[01:05:53] Chair Alison Hicks: Thank you. Any other in person speakers? Okay, seeing that. So move to online speakers. I mean, huh? Kevin, can you hear us?

[01:06:11] Kevin Ma: I can hear you. Can you hear me?

[01:06:13] Chair Alison Hicks: Yes.

[01:06:14] Kevin Ma: Hello, council members. My name is Kevin Ma. Oh, I live within a quarter mile on Brickstaff on Lay the Mortega, and I echo the sentiments of many of the commenters before that we should be focusing on the safety of the route. I bike on Rainstorf. It is not a great place to bike in any case. It is narrower places. There's the danger getting doored anytime because of where the bike lane is, it is a place where cars are clearly speeding all the time, irregardless of the blinking speed limit sign. And I feel like we should be focusing on the safety aspect. It is on the safe routes of school map, but it's clearly not safe. If you I do recommend the council members to take a bike ride, see how it feels. Um, And you know, this would address some of the concerns from the neighborhood, right? People have brought up if people cannot bike safely to their schools. They have to get their parents to some other way to just drop them off a car and that's clearly just going to add traffic everywhere on the route. And it is a pretty busy route, right? It is a lot of people's way, quickest way to get to one on one from a lot of neighborhoods. It is the quickest way to get to Costco. So. We should be focusing on that. I do have an objection that was also shared about members today was that I don't like the fact that the alternatives seem to be pitting different parts of the community against each other, right? We do want greenery. We do want safety for bikers, we want safety for pedestrians. If we are, think alternatives, we should be thinking much more block by block because yes, there is a budget in terms of space, unless we would like to remove a lane, which I personally prefer, but obviously that's broader conversation that was not touched upon in the alternatives. And I do wish to that the city would focus more on ensuring that the public right away is serving public uses. And, you know, perhaps I'm radical for things like price parking, but, you know, or residential parking permits, but, you know, it's what's necessary to make our city more vibrant and sustainable as mentioned, people have mentioned, there will be, I hope, more people live in the city. Thank you.

[01:08:31] Chair Alison Hicks: Thank you. For virtual speakers? Flip. Are you there? I'm

[01:08:42] Cliff Chambers: I'm here. Cliff Chambers, uh, Mountain View resident. I live about 100 yards from Renstorff Avenue. I bicycled and walked a lot over the last 22 years along the corridor. Green complete streets. Originally, the direction that the council gave was a focus on making all users, bicyclists, pedestrian, auto users, all have a comfortable and safe user experience. The options that have been presented are not, um, a complete streets in their entire, as the, uh, previous speaker said, we can't pit pedestrians against bicyclists. We need to have an integrated options that promote and the comfort of all users. And I really support. I was a uh, a cosigner of what uh, April Webster, uh, had as a motion, and I hope that the council transportation committee seriously considers it. And the reason I support this, is that for many years, I was a bicyclist on Rankstorff, if I go to Rankstorff, Park, I go to FedEx office, when I was working, and the stretch, particularly between Central Expressway, and El Camino, is very dangerous. I have a junior, Los Altos High School. And it's not safe for her to ride, so she does take the bus, but I would like her to get more exercise and being able to do it. There's just no safe way to ride on rank starf right now. And I just want to echo that that's extremely important. The side, I now have low vision and I have to walk just about everywhere. I'm able to negotiate the sidewalks just fine. They don't need to be widened. We, what we need to focus on is the user experience of pedestrians and bicyclists. We need more tree canopy. This was pointed out in the biodiversity plant. We, we definitely at Central Expressway and Rankstorf. It's a hot day. It's it's not a good solution. So I hope the council transportation committee focuses on the user experience, and I hope that you can seriously consider the joint letter motion that was presented to you, because I think we all want a safe rankstorff avenue. Thank you very much.

[01:11:33] Chair Alison Hicks: Thank you. Oh, you know, I forgot to ask, uh, whether there are any, some people requested that high school students speak to us, so they can go home and do. So are there any noticeable, uh, high school students, they said if they came, they may label themselves. Do you see anyone labeled that way? No, um, all the names are either 1st name, last name, or okay, I'm not going to be able to honor that request. Okay, so your next virtual speaker. Jesse. Jesse, do you hear us? Yeah. James Paulson Hall. James to small.

[01:12:25] James Paulson Hall: Good evening. I'll try to keep myself brief since my comment's already recorded in many spots. I'm speaking for myself, and I want to just emphasize the importance of prioritizing safety here, as others have said, this corridor is a one that appears on every possible metric of being critical to improve safety, and is one where we should do so. It is difficult to make trade-offs on roads that have large numbers of driveways, large number people, slowly not living along them and are also arterials. But that doesn't mean we can't prioritize safety, make it so that we have continuous protected bike wings, make sure the sidewalks are good and navigable, and make it a good road for everyone. I do appreciate that some of the priority that staff did put into intersections on the project, since intersections are the biggest issue on these sorts of routes, but we also need to make sure the space between the intersections is safe for all the users. And the last thing I want to mention is that I want to make sure we don't take the wrong lessons from the projects along California Street. I think that one of the lessons there I saw was if you make the wrong compromises, you just don't make, you make everyone a bit less happy. And if we fully embrace the need to make this corridor safer, I think that will be the right thing for the corridor. Thank you.

[01:13:39] Chair Alison Hicks: Thank you Jesse

[01:13:46] Unknown Speaker: is bad. Jesse,

[01:13:48] Chair Alison Hicks: are you back? Then he hears you because... Okay, well maybe we, are you back now or you?

[01:14:03] Jesse: Yeah, can you hear me all right?

[01:14:04] Chair Alison Hicks: Yes, we can.

[01:14:06] Jesse: Oh, okay, great. Thank you. Um, sorry, I had a little trouble getting connected, but, um, I wanted to generally support, um, the comments that April Webster made earlier, um, referencing the joint letter that we'd just like to see, um, all these options combined so that we can have a truly complete green street, um, and, you know, take rain store from one of the most dangerous roads to one of the nicest roads for for residents and make it a really enjoyable experience, whether you're walking, biking, Driving. Um, and really put safety first. So, If, if that is not possible. If council decides, oh, we really have to choose one of these 3 alternatives, then I would support alternative B. Um, let the caveat that the bike lanes really need to be protected, um, physically separated, uh, and continuously across the whole length of the corridor. Uh, as a previous commenter, uh, mentioned, there's a boat parked there that sticks way out. I've, I ride to, um, Costco, Mira West, the taco truck, um, partner acrobatics lessons twice a week, um, at the Akido gym. Um, and yeah, there's a, definitely a stretch um, closer to the Costco area where the bike lane. Well, it technically exists. It's pretty much useless because there's so many oversized vehicles parked either right up to the line or like into the bike lane several feet. So you kind of have to take the lane of traffic. Um, in order to be safe. Um, and then motorists get mad at you. It feels very risky. And that's why a lot of people aren't biking there now. It's not because it doesn't go where they want to go or need to go. Uh, it's because it's scary. So. Please, please improve the safety and and put safety first. All right. Thank you. That's it.

[01:16:01] Chair Alison Hicks: Yep. John Scarborough. John Scarborough? are you there?

[01:16:13] John Scarborough: Yes, I'm here.

[01:16:19] Chair Alison Hicks: Okay, you can speak.

[01:16:23] John Scarborough: Oh, yes, I thought I unmuted, but did not.

[01:16:26] Chair Alison Hicks: You did? Okay.

[01:16:28] John Scarborough: Well, I'm John Scarborough. I've been in Mountain View for about 24 years now, biking a lot of places, driving some places, and walking. I live on right off a ringstorf between Middlefield and Central. So I bike to the north to Costco, sometimes to shoreline to the south a lot, and my kids were both going to Los Altos High School. So for about 6 years. They rode there most every day on their bikes and I rode there several times a week. And What I would like to do, 1st is mention some things about what's on the table now and then step back a little bit to give it a broader perspective. So I think for this, I agree with a lot of what I've heard that having the 3 alternatives that kind of pitted good things against each other rather than having a sensitive design to the specifics of each part of the street, like where there's pinch points, where there's plenty of room versus not enough room, um, it would be better to have a more specified rather than one size fits all and is exclusive of other things. type of design. So I support a lot of what I heard on that. Um, As I mentioned, my kids went to Los Altos, high school, and for about 6 years, we were riding there and back with both of them. And most of, well, they, any of the kids from West of Shoreline, North of Central. Ringstorf is pretty much their way to get to school. You know, of course, they could go via Shoreline or San Antonio or underneath the train station, but really, ringstorf is generally the quickest way to get there. So it's very important to get that better and to back out a little bit. We've got other goals in our community that would be helped by making the street greener and safer, like we want to have a better community for all. And I notice when I walk on a ring store for when I ride my bike even, I have a lot more communication with folks than I do when I'm driving. And when I'm driving, the communication that I usually see is not really that friendly. So I, Yeah, so I think the more we can get people walking and biking, that's going to be better for a community, the more trees we get, the more resilient we're going to be to the increased temperatures, and the more we get people out of cars and able to walk around, the better we're going to be for these gas priced shocks that we're getting, and we'll probably continue to get. And thinking even further, the kids that learn how to ride their bikes to school or to take transit or to walk, they're going to carry that with them through their adulthood and whether they're here in Mountain View or somewhere else, they're going to help be more of the solutions. So, thanks for your work on this and I encourage you to. Combine them to make the best plan possible. Thank you.

[01:19:29] Chair Alison Hicks: Right on 0 Are there more virtual speakers? Daniel Healthy. Daniel, you're next.

[01:19:42] Daniel Hulse: Hi, yeah, can you hear me?

[01:19:45] Chair Alison Hicks: I can, we can.

[01:19:46] Daniel Hulse: Oh, all right. Um, so I'm just uh, calling in to support uh, putting in as continuous of a protected bike lane as you can on Rangstorf. Um, as well as improve all the crossings and do really everything, everything to complete the street, you know, I don't think we should be doing a complete streets project where we build an incomplete street. Uh, we want, we want to have a complete street with as complete of a bike lane as possible. All of those gaps where there's just awful crossings. We got a, we got a dress. And, uh, you know, because I heard about this. I decided, you know, I'm going to ride my bike on, on Rangstorf today. And, uh, A few things kind of came up to me. One was wow. Uh, What a street with immense transportation value as a cyclist, uh, because it goes from California Street, Street I live on, it crosses uh, Central Expressway, and the Caltrain tracks. And then it goes all the way up to major job centers. It goes to shopping. It goes to parks, housing. So, uh, really, really important and not really, there's no parallel crossing for Caltrain. It's exclusive. So, really important. The other thing that kind of, uh, hit me was lots of people are taking this right now and it's not safe. It's just not safe. Uh, and that's why I've been avoiding it all these years. And so I think we've got to do our best to protect people, and that means as continuous as possible of a class for bike lane. And, you know, in addition to that, I think, uh, examining the traffic flow on the street. It's it's very much centered around the crossing, which we're going to resolve. If you go a little north of the crossing, there's not all that much traffic, and so you have this open roadway effect where you have like one or 2 cars going as fast as they can, which is a really unsafe situation, and so, you know, we should consider road diets, for example, to uh, resolve that situation and have more laminar traffic flow. Um, and in addition, we've got this VTA crossing for 101 that's going to put in a really nice uh, crossing on on ring store protected from uh, cars that we also want to integrate with uh, that new crossing. And so I think as continuous as possible of a protected bike lane, that's my priority. We should have all this other stuff too. Um, But, uh, yeah, let's not, let's not, uh, only do one thing. An incomplete street for a complete streets project. lets not do that. Thank you.

[01:22:54] Chair Alison Hicks: And are there more virtual speakers? Not a couple. Rashmi? Rashmi, you're up.

[01:23:04] Rashmi Sahai: Hi, can you hear me?

[01:23:07] Chair Alison Hicks: Yes, yes, we can hear you.

[01:23:15] Rashmi Sahai: Are you still here? Sorry, can you hear me now? I don't know what happened.

[01:23:20] Chair Alison Hicks: Yes, we can. We can hear you.

[01:23:22] Rashmi Sahai: I have to unmute again, but, um, I will stay still and not touch anything. Okay, my name is Rashmi Sahai, and I'm a member of Green Spaces Mountain View, and I'm also a mom with a cargo bike. I have a 4 year old and an 8 year old, and my 8 year old is starting to bike on his own now too, and we do bike on Rankdorf because it is one of the only options to go places we need to go. It's pretty scary. I don't like doing it, but for example, for swim lessons. that's where we need to do it Um, and my son, when he's biking. I ask him to bike on the sidewalk because I just don't feel safe about it at all. So that's just kind of my back our background. We live about 2 blocks away from, um, Rankstorf close to the park. But I would like to join April and other speakers here today and requesting that the CTC support a full green complete streets concept, that integrates the core safety and green infrastructure elements that were tested individually, and alternatives A, B, and C, rather than selecting among the current alternatives as is. I also took the survey, and I did not feel like it gave me many options, so I filled in other whenever possible. But specifically, um, we need to have a continuous class for protected bike lane and green infrastructure, including street trees, native and biodiversity supported plantings, and functional greens, storm water infrastructure. And um, to be able to achieve this. It would be great to see some of the creative ideas that April had mentioned and were included in the letter. Um, to get to where we want to go. Um, I don't think that, um, choosing one of the 3 options is, is an option. Um, and yeah, I look forward to the next round and to see, um, where we've gone from here. Thank you so much. Thank you.

[01:25:15] Chair Alison Hicks: And more speakers? Bruce England? Bruce, here next. Kyle.

[01:25:25] Bruce England: Uh, Bruce England, Wisman Station Drive. I get to my notes. So, I'd like to thank everybody who's been working on this over time, including transportation staff and this committee. First off, I support the comment letter authored by April Webster. You've been hearing about from other people too. And I helped collaborate on the letter. I do have a few additional comments. I bike along Rengsdorf and Feeder streets at least twice a week between Croissanto and Heritage Park. With big old buckets of food scraps from Hope's corner. And I actually choose Croissanto specifically because I don't feel that biking past the community center is as safe as could be, as it's currently set up. There's a lot of traffic, a lot of activity. People moving in and out of those driveways. Other adjacent project impacts, um, such as the feed in from Cresanto Avenue with 2 right turn lanes for vehicles and no shoulder space. I mean, really, literally no shoulder space recyclists. The Rengdorf Avenue grade separation project, and the Escuela Almonte project. Such interfaces beyond the project boundaries are important too. So I, I don't see those mentioned. I'd like to see them included or addressed somehow. I'm also concerned that we see LOS measurements here rather than VMT and no consideration for narrowing traffic lanes. Lastly, I agree with Tracy Chu's comments from the last BPAC meeting, that more cohesiveness across the plan would be welcome and that attention to the natural details is essential, such as keeping tree planting option, options active for future planning. And then I've got a few additional comments. You've already heard this from some people, but the idea that, um, um, staff is saying that A, B, and C are not mutually exclusives, exclusive those options. Um, and they, they told us that, um, they did that to test and to isolate and test different features and that it would be possible to combine them in the next round of design. So something for you to think about and address in your um, deliberations and your questions, I suppose. Um, And we would like to ask why the survey only allows respondents to choose one feature, as has been pointed out. Um, and then lastly, what's important, um, and this has been alluded to, is having a strong connected network so that we are not creating bicycle islands. Um, and getting, you know, serving to get people out of their cars and vehicles as much as possible. And I agree with a lot of the comments that say that, you know, all modes of travel need to be addressed and also strongly agree that having this be a solid green complete street project is very important. And that's it. Thank you.

[01:28:14] Chair Alison Hicks: Thank you. One or 2 more speakers. No more raised hand. No more speakers. Okay. Okay, so with that, I'm going to bring it back to the committee for questions first. Do anything? Do any committee members have questions? Um, And uh, Oh, you have any questions? Council member, can I, can you hear us?

[01:29:10] Transportation Planner Ahmed: So you're muted.

[01:29:11] Chair Alison Hicks: She's a panelist. Muted and you can't unmute is what it looks like. And now you're frozen. Now you're unfrozed. Yeah, but there we go.

[01:29:26] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Sorry, it's not the not the best reception up here. Um, but I just, I heard a couple questions come up throughout all of the public comment. And so I didn't know if committee members were going to ask for those questions to be answered or if staff could answer some of those.

[01:29:44] Chair Alison Hicks: Why don't you single out the ones that you heard? And uh, Steph, can you? Uh-oh, uh-oh. Oh, you're back.

[01:29:58] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: It would, it would just be so much better if the 2 of you could ask some of those questions because I don't think my connection is that great.

[01:30:05] Chair Alison Hicks: Okay, we can hear you now, but um. Council member McAllister, can I ask your questions?

[01:30:12] Committee Member John McAlister: Sure. Um, Well, I had a boatload, but I'm just gonna. Keep it simple. And uh, I just want to start off. I'm not opposed to my... 2015, I was one of the 1st ones when I was mayor, we pushed for bike lanes, and we got a lot of themselves. But I put a lot of things more in context because that's my job. I got 85,000 people to work with, and the way I always put things in context. So, I guess I'll just start to the big question. The gauge, the grade separation is just going to change the whole landscape out here. So, How are you going to take what you're doing now? And then the last, the, Great separation, we're moving forward with GTA and trying to get it, that's 5 years, 10 years out maybe for that. How? We've been working on this stuff. And we know that the streets are going to get torn. The light, the roads are going to get stronger. The current streets feeding in will disappear. There's going to be, and someone wasn't sure about, but they mentioned, uh, Casaranto, proposed bridge right now, that spring bridge going across, yeah. So how are you going to plan? Efficiently to do things that you know, could be changed by the great separation. Sorry, if you want. Go ahead, I'll start. I'll

[01:31:44] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: start. So Lauren led better transportation manager. Thank you for the question. Um, one of the things I want to point out is that this is the very 1st stage of this study. So there will be a lot, it's a longer term process, probably than the great separation. So it is potential that the great separation goes in 1st and then study comes in next, just depending on the outcome of the study, how much it will cost, the funding for it. I don't know.

[01:32:17] Public Works Director Ng: Yeah. So right now what we're looking at, oh, Jennifer Inng. works director. Um, We're looking at currently phasing the ranks for grade separation project into 2 construction packages. The 1st one would be what we call the Leland connector. It's really to align Leland Avenue, but as part of that 1st phase, we are also looking at making the disconnection of croissanto out to Ranksdorf. So, That um, project is pretty well in design, it's at 65%. Um, we're looking at possibly going out to construction as soon as about a year from now. And so that, 1st phase, we have enough money for, and we can proceed ahead, but the actual race separation, which, of course, take the road down, and underneath the country. So. There is good news ahead for uh, how the great separation will be interfacing. Uh, Rankstorf Avenue. In short, it'll be in 2 pieces. So, oh,

[01:33:19] Committee Member John McAlister: there's a lot unknowns. So we're spending Quite a bit of time. Trying to figure out all these parameters and ideas and so forth. But at the end of the day, when we get close there. What we're proposing here, may not be applicable at all because of the way the construction of, ring store for this, green separation, more. Hopefully it's gonna be a good one. You

[01:33:47] Public Works Director Ng: know, when it goes under. When the street goes under, the cow, or the, yeah, the Caltrain tracks. Um, it will be wide enough to accommodate 1000000s of traffic in each direction as well as having a separated, um, bicycle facility to get us across, um, the barrier of healthy. So, when

[01:34:06] Committee Member John McAlister: you say this is a long-term project. This is going to come after the grade separation. May. Okay. So chicken or the egg?

[01:34:21] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: If I may, this project does not recommend any improvements within footprint of the great separation, and we just coordinating with the great separation, to make sure any recommendations would interface with what's. So the idea is that section will be addressed by the great separation and this project will. So

[01:34:45] Committee Member John McAlister: give us remind us the, The length of the great separation, where where you think it starts on the south, where it's going to end it.

[01:34:57] Public Works Director Ng: Um, where it starts to dive down is where the new Leland connector will come in. So it's a little bit more to the south, as we're currently comes in. And then it dives down, goes under the tracks and pops up on the other side. Um, about just, just a little past the shell station. Um. It

[01:35:21] Committee Member John McAlister: was mentioned and I do appreciate. That's better. A lot of it. The report. That's through some. That you did recognize that this is a main artery, automobile artery. This, shoreline, San Antonio, are the main way to see people from the south to the north to 101. And I appreciate that you guys make comments that. You recognize the importance of people. We need to make sure that we do get people going through. And it was interesting. Uh, I have to, man, George. He made an excellent point, is that, if there's grace, when a separation comes through, It's going to reduce, it's going to encourage people, more people to use it because it's going to be much easier to get through town. So the traffic, Probably interest, because right now you have to go shoreline for San Antonio. Because it is, uh, time consuming to go over the rainstorm. So, um, Is there any way to project that? that, The increase in traffic. So far. Yeah,

[01:36:38] Public Works Director Ng: I don't think we ran a model. Okay. That's

[01:36:42] Committee Member John McAlister: that's an excellent point. He brings up a lot of good points. Um, I had another question. So when I asked about how many bicycles, I always asked for data, and then you had these charts on Fenix A, page 70, 71, 82, 83. How do I read those? Uh,

[01:37:01] Transportation Planner Ahmed: it's, uh, the existing condition of your contract. Right. Right. And then there's,

[01:37:06] Committee Member John McAlister: well, there was the, the diagram and then there was this whole list of times. The

[01:37:10] Transportation Planner Ahmed: time our vehicle or delay. Well,

[01:37:16] Committee Member John McAlister: there was section said vehicle at the top, and then the other one said, bicyclist. Correct.

[01:37:21] Transportation Planner Ahmed: I'm trying to understand. So the bicyclist one is on page. I'll

[01:37:27] Committee Member John McAlister: go to page 70. That's one at 1st... And if there's any way you can throw it up on the screen for all time. Let

[01:37:34] Transportation Planner Ahmed: me go first. Oh, so oh, you're looking at the raw data. So these. If you go to this. It

[01:38:00] Committee Member John McAlister: was like 70, 71, there was different segments of Green Star. Right,

[01:38:07] Transportation Planner Ahmed: so, um, Page 70, This is showing the raw data volume, that's connected, collected by the power. And to read that, you have, There's pets. Bye, there's pet. These are prime. Are we supposed to

[01:38:50] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: be hearing something? No,

[01:38:53] Committee Member John McAlister: that's okay, yeah, that there's page. Okay, but I can't,

[01:38:58] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: I can't hear Adam. Can anyone else? Adam,

[01:39:01] Chair Alison Hicks: have you been speaking to Adam? Uh. Yeah,

[01:39:06] Transportation Planner Ahmed: Adam, most of us cannot hear you. So these are bikes. So you say groups printed slash bites, and brainstorm southbound, going toward El Camino, Leghorn, westbound, and rings are northbound going to 101. And on the side. So it's right left through, and we have had going across too. Right. So let's

[01:39:29] Committee Member John McAlister: just say the 8 o'clock. If you go across, it shows one person going uh, southbound, on ring store, towards, uh, Leghorn, or the other way around.

[01:39:42] Transportation Planner Ahmed: Southbound wank start going toward El Camino. So

[01:39:47] Committee Member John McAlister: we have one person. E, we have one person at 815. We got 2 people. So I'm looking at it, then all of a sudden we go from 9 000000. Bunch of zeros. We don't have a lot of people, right? So help me. Understand how you're taking this data. That doesn't show. Much to, uh, activity, and more faking it into something greater than it represents. Yeah,

[01:40:18] Transportation Planner Ahmed: each intersection has different demands. So Leghorn is the low, so in the lower side. Uh, but if you look at raw, um, California. Uh, Stanford, um, you will be able to see the stum of the peak hour that we are showing. So a better graph. I mean, the graph I have used to summarize it, actually done by Adams team, our consultant, from Kimberly Horn, is if you go to page 25. Big one, yeah. Yeah, so this one is showing. If you were a pet, you're going along California, 17 people crossing during AF. Box

[01:41:18] Chair Alison Hicks: are you? Just which box

[01:41:20] Transportation Planner Ahmed: are you looking? This one, right here. I'm trying to show. Looks on the right. The little person walking right on the right. Yeah, there we go. So, That's one of the high activity intersections. So this one you can see, there's 17 people walking, 23 people walking on the other side of California.

[01:41:45] Chair Alison Hicks: What time span is it?

[01:41:46] Transportation Planner Ahmed: This is the peak time morning time. So it would be either 7 to 745 or 8 to 845 or 852. 845. So we had 23

[01:41:58] Chair Alison Hicks: people walking. Yeah,

[01:42:00] Transportation Planner Ahmed: and a long, a long rainstraw would be the top two. So it's 16 people and then 27 people on the bottom. I'm talking about the morning time. Yeah. Yeah,

[01:42:11] Chair Alison Hicks: that's Monday through Friday I guess.

[01:42:13] Transportation Planner Ahmed: That's one day. So December ninth. I would say this is winter month, we would expect to see more during fall, summer, at spring.

[01:42:23] Chair Alison Hicks: And how many at the same time, how many bikers do you? Yeah,

[01:42:26] Transportation Planner Ahmed: so the bikers, the little person on a bike. So they're going along rainstorm, if you look, if you think about, um, going northbound, so you would add all of that, 67, and on the other side, it's 19, one, uh, so it's 21. Thank you, and that would, I would assume school traffic. So

[01:42:47] Committee Member John McAlister: is this a rush hour example? That

[01:42:49] Transportation Planner Ahmed: is a restaurant, so.

[01:42:50] Committee Member John McAlister: That's a non-rush hour example. Uh,

[01:42:53] Transportation Planner Ahmed: that I would need to pull out of longer data, but we look at the peak volume just at the car to estimate the traffic congestion. We would look at the peak time. Uh, bike and pet activity to understand that demand. So

[01:43:08] Committee Member John McAlister: that would you? Just, you're a professional. Did you think that the demand would tracks, uh, change drastically, just by half maybe?

[01:43:18] Transportation Planner Ahmed: I am not sure because it's a lot of school traffic and school traffic happens middle of the day between 2 to 330. Uh, I also do say crowds, so I tend to see uh, traffic along that and then you'll be a commute time starting 334. Um, so that's something we would have to kind of plot it out like we did for our average daily volume, so I won't be able to confidently answer that.

[01:43:44] Committee Member John McAlister: So you mentioned...

[01:43:45] Unknown Speaker: It would be less. Okay. Thank you on that one. Um. The. Okay,

[01:43:57] Committee Member John McAlister: that's weird. Uh, So you're gonna put in some process, section, uh, midsections, and I ask the question, how far apart do you usually decide how far a midsection is? Yeah. section. So I looked

[01:44:16] Transportation Planner Ahmed: up um, you know, what we have. So METCD says it have to be at least 300 feet apart from a controlled traffic signal and both of these signals are about 5 to 700 feet. So we are meeting kind of the minimum threshold. Um, as part of vision 0, we identifying anything more than 700 feet too, out a midwall profit, because that's when we tend to see people jaywalking or tossing when there was not possible. Well,

[01:44:49] Committee Member John McAlister: I can see what's going on on on the west side of the street. So when you bring it over to the right side, to the, East side. Is there any particular, uh, connection that you're looking for, is it just because, on the west side, that's a good startup point. Uh,

[01:45:08] Transportation Planner Ahmed: the, there were, we were kind of looking at, We did a couple of field study and the walking tour and we saw where people were generally crossing. There was a school, there's a nursery that they had to kind of go around and look like they, you know, they, if there was a mid block talking, they would use it. So that's sort of one of the, you know, data point we use to identify. We also did, our 1st survey had where people can drop pins, and that also was kind of stink into our mid block processing recommendation. Um, If, you know, that's something we are still taking input on where exactly you put them. These are kind of our 1st draft, our take on this. So, you know, they're cute. So are you saying

[01:45:52] Committee Member John McAlister: 1st draft is based on the distance between other crossings or people said, well, this is a good place for us to cross. Um,

[01:46:00] Transportation Planner Ahmed: I, it is, making sure there is enough distance between the 2 intersections and then identifying and then looking at our uh, serving responses and our walking toward to see where people want the process and they usually match up because when they are far apart, people tend to process the middle.

[01:46:17] Committee Member John McAlister: How many people would you consider good spots? Public input on this one. Well,

[01:46:23] Transportation Planner Ahmed: the survey, we received one, the 1st one. And um, I need to look back up how many exactly responded to that specific, uh, measure, that perspective, um, idea that we have. And then for a walking tour, we did walking, and that was, I think, that group was about 75 to 7 people that walked, and I know they talked about mid-block talking. You

[01:46:49] Committee Member John McAlister: have junction as a cross law. But Junction is sort of gonna disappear into the. But it's separation, isn't it? Junction,

[01:46:59] Transportation Planner Ahmed: I believe that's actually an ongoing project. We are designing a pedestrian hybrid vegan. And that is further not north up than. Next to the Mexican restaurant. That's leaving a lot of shaking cats now. Junction is, uh, Junction is close to Montala.

[01:47:21] Committee Member John McAlister: Oh, that's on that street next to Safeway. Yeah. Okay.

[01:47:24] Transportation Planner Ahmed: It's north. It's north, north. North, right.

[01:47:27] Committee Member John McAlister: And you want, okay, so you want to put a crosswalk there? I

[01:47:30] Transportation Planner Ahmed: believe there's an existing crossword there. So we are going to, uh, we are going to, uh, update it to put better work inside for pet and bike, but the car can see them because they cross. Um. I think that's happening separately. It's a design. So,

[01:47:54] Committee Member John McAlister: I sent you a picture earlier today, director, when I mentioned to you about, uh, in Santa Clara. That was like, I read that the, uh, in Santa Clara, there's a, they use a sidewalk, I have an arrow going one direction arrow going the other, and it looks like it's combo white, walk bike lane. Would that be something that might be considered? Uh. To sort of accommodate. Maximize space. That's

[01:48:22] Public Works Director Ng: what's referred to as a class one, well, Taiuse Trail, where we have pedestrians and bicyclists sharing the same space, and the Santa Clara example, they just happen to put the arrows showing different directionalities. For something like that, we would need quite a bit of space in the public right away. It's generally, I want to say 10 feet wide as a minimum. Um, to start with, and we generally don't have that much space on either single side of the street right now. Um, and so the

[01:48:53] Committee Member John McAlister: current CIP has, has, that was just done for the study. Has that money been all? Has the study been completed based on the what the Caltrain grant list? The

[01:49:05] Transportation Planner Ahmed: current CIP is for this feasibility study and Calchins planning grant is, Funding this to complete the planning study. That's

[01:49:16] Committee Member John McAlister: 25 dash 39. 25

[01:49:18] Unknown Speaker: to yes. So, uh,

[01:49:21] Committee Member John McAlister: there was also another thing I saw on there. Was the ringstorf adaptive signal project.

[01:49:33] Transportation Planner Ahmed: I can find out that. Yeah. Um. So, so

[01:49:39] Committee Member John McAlister: there was concern about door, Doring. Um, have we had much reports of people storing, uh, people hitting car doors as they're coming to? Um,

[01:49:50] Transportation Planner Ahmed: I have not, um, When we look. These

[01:49:55] Terry Barton: reports don't report specifically, they show the direction of travel. They wouldn't be able to tell if it's a door or other part of the vehicle. I have seen one, for instance, on my kids. Yeah,

[01:50:09] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: it's not something, it's not something that's recorded as part of the police reports. Although if we had received a comment from ask MB or a plane, it was a place that they worked hardly. have that information. We would have that information. Um, I

[01:50:24] Transportation Planner Ahmed: can get back to you. I don't know that, yeah, but it would be an incomplete set. On

[01:50:29] Committee Member John McAlister: attachment 3 page 14. What do the different colors mean on the chart? Yeah. I

[01:50:36] Transportation Planner Ahmed: know that question. Oh, yes. I know the answer. Okay, so, um, welcome to Peach number again. It

[01:50:46] Committee Member John McAlister: was page um. Oh, 14.

[01:50:52] Transportation Planner Ahmed: Okay. So if you scroll, I think, yeah. So this question asked about what improvements would they like to see and they could frank it. So between the three, they can only choose 3 top priorities. This corridor has very constrained right away. So we wanted to see what people would really, really like to see. So rank one is that darker, shady, blue. Wait, 2 is a lighter and then you have the yellowish. So you can see frosting kind of. Okay,

[01:51:26] Committee Member John McAlister: so okay, so let's take the 1st one. There are safety crossings at sections. The green is, let's say, 25%. Okay, so that's the, this is the rank choice, and then the 2nd ranking for all those people said that the blue is their 2nd choice. So this is a compilation of everybody. Okay. So the improvements for people with disabilities had the least amount of responses. Uh, yeah. Okay. I saw that, I go, okay, that was up. Um, um. Okay, this was close to my. What happened to the comprehensive mortal? It

[01:52:12] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: was adopted in 2021. And I know that we used that at least for the starting point for the access empty is what I'm talking about. And we set a starting point for the active transportation plan recommendations or hosting apps, I should say. And you refer to it as on this study as well. Um,

[01:52:38] Transportation Planner Ahmed: this, that was also, uh, we also took some of, we also took the prioritization from that study as part of vision, which ended recommended this as number one project. So quite out of plan, follow on from that plan. That's

[01:52:54] Chair Alison Hicks: 5 questions for nothing. Okay, so council number, can I, do you want me to go before you or do you want to go before me, which I'll go with whatever your preference is because of your connection? No,

[01:53:05] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: no, I just, my my question was just if staff had any comments on the questions that the public had asked and I don't know if you were going to follow up on any of those chair hicks, but I was trying to like note them down, but, um, Some

[01:53:19] Chair Alison Hicks: notes on what the public said, but I did not. I have my own questions. I didn't okay. I didn't, I guess you noted them differently because I didn't. There may be some that overlapped with my questions, but otherwise I didn't pick, I picked up more comments. Same here. Well, I think,

[01:53:37] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: I think one of, one of the things that I heard over and over was, um, what we got presented tonight versus, you know, being able to put kind of a more comprehensive instead of it being one of the 3 plans, being able to find something more comprehensive. And so that was a question that I heard over and over again and wanted staff to be able to answer that.

[01:54:00] Chair Alison Hicks: Okay, I thought, yeah. I think that's a main theme. Yeah, so it's a question. Yeah,

[01:54:05] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: so that's my question. So are we able to, do we need, Do we need to spend time focusing on the 3 various alternatives or if the committee is interested, are we able to do what the public had mentioned, which is they had heard feedback from staff that would all be incorporated, and we could kind of do something more comprehensive? So that's the question. Okay,

[01:54:28] Chair Alison Hicks: I did have a tangential question, so maybe they can answer both yours. Okay. There are a bunch of members of the public and groups tried to um, address that same, uh, that same question about. Can we kind of do a little bit of everything through emotion. And I was wondering whether the motion, whether adopting that motion would be helpful in terms of consolidating a lot of community input moving forward. So sort of the same question, council member is asking from a different angle. answer both questions.

[01:55:01] Transportation Planner Ahmed: I can start on sort of how we developed the alternatives and what is our kind of purpose of this process at where we are. So we are kind of very beginning of this planning visibility study. And the way we crafted these alternative definitions and public input from round one and really try to understand. Given brainstorm is constrained with 2 traveling on each direction, on street parking with high utilization on north part, and having a high bike and pet activity along it. What would it look like if we did intersection improvements where we do see some of the severe collisions? And then to further that, what would it look like if we did? By improvements? And then what we did, what we, and what would it look like if we did kind of improvements? In doing so, what we were hoping to do is highlight the trade-offs. If we do a bike lane, we are removing 64% of the parking, 60% of the parking, which we did find have utilization along corridor. And that is something during our community meeting we heard sentiments that that is an important feature of their travel. Uh, we heard a lot about sidewalk winding and greening a lot. So if we did that alternative, what are some of the trade-off? One trade-off is that our flight separation. We're not able to provide a bike separation. And The combination of it, uh, will have combination of this trade-up. Um, it will have uh, parking removal, perhaps uh, one of the lane will drop because to take 6 foot of sidewalk and then another 9 foot or or 8 foot for bike lane with separation will require that much of right of way. Um, we are going into this with a very transparent, clear eyed way that this is, this is one of the hardest, uh, laying constrained space that I have worked on. So what does that mean in terms of Developing a plan that is going to be meeting a lot of the expectation and need for this corridor. Um, so that's, that's, that was the purpose. And I think, um, again, it's a draft. We are coming up the 1st time. Amalgamation of it is probably, you know, makes sense to kind of put together. This is kind of showing if you take one option all the way through, what are some of the trade-offs? Or. I

[01:57:45] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: was just gonna, just at the very high level. We cannot combine all the alternatives together without making a tradeoff. Some other. But what I'm

[01:57:56] Chair Alison Hicks: hearing is you can't maximize all three. But you can do some of each. Mm. In

[01:58:07] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: segments? I imagine you could, but we, so what I heard was a request for continuous platform likeways. And we cannot do that. We cannot do that with the alternative. Which maintains the 2 travel lanes. And we did attempt to maintain the parking. We could also provide the platform by way. And we did look at removing a travel lane and the analysis suggested that the intersections north of Central Expressway would significantly be active. And we did not have staff field, any person, or that, uh, gravitation. So

[01:58:54] Chair Alison Hicks: I have follow-up questions, but I don't want to trample all over a council number to ask questions. Sorry,

[01:59:01] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: thanks. So I guess I'm just trying to seek clarity as we like go into discussion tonight. So, What was the answer to that? Ms. Ludwetter? Sorry. We

[01:59:15] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: cannot combine all of the elements together into one unified um and unless we receive direction from the CTC on what trade-offs we need to make. Okay.

[01:59:28] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: What if, what, so there was also some comments about perhaps bringing in elements of alternative? What is it, A and, sorry, B and C? Would that be, I guess, uh, more amenable than all 3 alternatives, you know, combined into one? Could we work on? That.

[01:59:51] Transportation Planner Ahmed: Would that be would that be segment of, let's say, I'm on a stadiotral rock, we say, widening sidewalk because. That's, you know, you see a sidewalk narrowing there and keeping class 2 or class 2 buffer, you know, biking with buffer versus. Later on, if we have widening sidewalk, we say we want to see. Fully protected by way. In that, I, you know, the trade-up is we are dropping bike cliff on and off throughout the corridor. And I, I, think what I also heard that we want to continue with biking. So, so I think I'm going more direction along those things. Yeah.

[02:00:31] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Yeah. So, I mean, I think it's important because if we're going to ask a bunch of questions, it's as helpful to understand what kind of direction we can provide that will actually yield, tangible. I guess tangible results, right? So if we want a continuous bike lanes, then we need to choose B. If we ask for, if we ask for a combination of B and C, maximizing, if we can, you know, bike, pet, you know, bike, pet friendly, then what I'm hearing from staff is, it would not be continuous bike lanes on rank store for that segment.

[02:01:10] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: Yeah, you would have to pick either of them either. So, so, option B, with the additional C greening, not necessarily the sidewalk widening. Uh-huh. You would need to get rid of parking. Okay. In order to

[02:01:26] Chair Alison Hicks: do the combination. So can I ask a tangential? I don't want to interrupt you, but I have a tangential question. So tell me, I can just wait until it's my turn, but no.

[02:01:37] Dr. Tracy Farita: No, no, no, no, no, no. Go ahead. Um, yeah. So, it

[02:01:41] Chair Alison Hicks: seems to me that the with the trade-offs. It seems to me that most people want some elements of each of these 3 options and that with the trade-offs. The one that most people brought up and that, frankly, I agree. Is that we don't need to buy the sidewalks here. We widen sidewalks where, you know, where they're, okay, I'm going to add a caveat, but, you widen sidewalks in urban areas, in places where there are 4 or 610 story buildings, and there's just so many people on the street. That is not Rangstorf. Now my caveat is with, um, some of the housing element changes. In Palo Alto, uh, in particular. Um, they, some of this may be impacted by that. But discounting that for a moment. Um, widening sidewalks. I, in a place like this widening side knocks will walks will not serve any purpose. It won't encourage more people to walk. There's no, there are not people, you know, there are not crowds walking down this street. So, no, it's a question. You had run ups to your questions too. Um, so, Given that that widening sidewalks is, is the multiple commenters have said, that's the least useful thing here. Um, can we get the if we drop that? Can we get the other elements, which is continuous, a continuous bike lane, and, um, maximize, I mean, what does help pedestrians is free canopy. So maximize that through some of the tools that you've shown, which are like bulb outs and things that don't take a whole width intersection. Yeah. Yeah. Um, where you can. Given those kind of judicious use of tree canopy, although maximum that you can do and a bike lane seem to be the biggest priorities. And and then the parking, there's some places where it seemed important. And somewhere people said it was less important. So keep it where it's important, maybe not 100%, maybe with tree bulb outs or something, so maybe it's less than 100%. With those kind of trade offs. Can you put those 3 things together? So,

[02:04:01] Transportation Planner Ahmed: um, other than looking at the tree canopy, alternative B, as is, is, is getting at that. That is the maximum continuous bike by facility we can provide with taking 60% off the parking. If we want to increase that separation, that would mean we are taking all the on-street parking, that is, that would understand, increased separation. We are providing, we are taking 50% of the parking to provide that buffer, that the continuous protected biking, where we can. If we want to increase, you know, because there's a certain area we drop, right? If we want to close those gaps, that would mean we are taking all the on street parking available because this area is just so constrained in order to create that we have to drop it. We can look. We can look to go explore if we can narrow the median to see if that gave us enough space, but that's something we have to go like block by block to kind of really make sure that's there. Um, I think if we receive direction to take on more parking. I think that's gonna alleviate a little bit of the constraint of how much biking, protected biking we can provide. Um, and in the tree canopy, uh, As of alternative A, we didn't look into sort of what the greenery for the intersection look like, but that's something we can consider. Okay.

[02:05:33] Chair Alison Hicks: So I'm not sure if other council members got what the trade-offs are. Um, and where, in terms of eliminating parking, where, where would you have to eliminate it? Because it seemed like it was more important on some parts of the road than others go to the? Yeah, we

[02:05:53] Transportation Planner Ahmed: are already ready. presentation. Um, we are already uh, eliminating quite a bit of parking. Um. And I can show you the places that we are keeping as is because we found that was a highly utilized area. Um, and you'll see one side of the bike lane drops from a protected to a class, class 2 uh, buffer. One more before. Yes. So the red area is where we are preserving parking. So right in front of the heritage part. So the right in front of Heritage Park is going to be providing parking. Um, and ride along over here. So even with removing parking on this side, this will still be A class still be a bike buffer. Uh, one thing we also noted along going through. Norn, like the myth and polony and going toward old middle field, that top section, there are quite a bit of driveways for residential. So a protected bike plane will have been in brakes. That's one of the reasons we are, showing, uh, Fighting with buffers, so the light blue on the bike lane with buffers and the dark people are the protected by blade. So the areas that are dropping, is keeping parking. And

[02:08:04] Chair Alison Hicks: is some of the parking that you're dropping there are some of the most used parking or the least used?

[02:08:09] Unknown Speaker: They are they are used. They're used. Yeah.

[02:08:20] Chair Alison Hicks: Okay, well, I feel like my questions are answered in terms of tradeoffs. I don't know if other, I don't know, uh, council number command, if you had other questions about trade-offs, because that seemed to be the major question you were on at that point. Well,

[02:08:37] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: so I mean, it, I, well, I guess we can talk about it when we go into deliberations. I'm just kind of curious then, if it seems that we're unable to kind of combine all 3 and we need, and even we can't combine B or C, then we really need to be choosing one. Is that what I'm hearing and, you know, Just want to make sure that I'm understanding correctly.

[02:09:07] Committee Member John McAlister: I'm just looking for. You know, are you wanting us to be definitive or just giving guidance? Yeah,

[02:09:15] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: because the council, the council action in the report says to recommend an alternative, so that's why I'm trying to, or, you know, of the plan. So I'm just trying to clarify.

[02:09:25] Transportation Planner Ahmed: It's an informational item. Yeah, my understanding

[02:09:30] Chair Alison Hicks: was not that we had that, yeah, from my direction, I'm on. But if, but I would like to hear from staff, whether, you know, if that's what counseling effort is reading, I'd like to know which it is. Because I thought we could give direction that was not just it. It's getting direction off. So

[02:09:49] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: I'll read what's in the report here. Staff requested CPC provide direction on what should be prioritized when staff develop a preferred concept. CPC may direct staff to develop a preferred concept, and the alternatives listed below or to develop a preferred concept that is a combination of the alternatives or includes other recommendations. The primary request tonight is to provide us with direction so that we can move forward with that direction, knowing what trade-offs, what elements of the of the Broadway should prioritize. They can come back to you with a concept. That does that prioritizes it. don't have. Correct.

[02:10:35] Chair Alison Hicks: Can I, did you have more questions? Or are we saving those for comments? and let me see if I had any more, um, Uh, Let's see. Oh, so most of my questions were on timing, which council member, McAllister, did and uh, uh, how we choose options and make comments, which we just did. And then, um, still the ideas for fixing, it seems like, Any ideas for fixing the Elk Mino Rimster intersection, which is an important element of the route to uh, to the uh, Los Altos high school, because I've heard a lot of comments on that.

[02:11:25] Transportation Planner Ahmed: Yeah, so um, there is, um, The city is protected intersections that have been listed in our capital improvement program. Uh, uh, ECR, uh, Il Camino and Wake Structure there. So we are going to try to see if this visibility study can include that intersection, um, as part of study. And

[02:11:48] Chair Alison Hicks: it seems like, uh, having, uh, crossings on both sides of the street might be super helpful. Is that part of that?

[02:11:59] Unknown Speaker: We can, we can explore that. part of this. Um,

[02:12:03] Chair Alison Hicks: and I guess my last question is the, um, motion that a lot of community groups and so forth, um, recommended. Would that be helpful and kind of solidating to kind of say look that over and use that. Would that be helpful to you?

[02:12:19] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: I think the challenge is, it still doesn't give us what we need, which is we need some direction on. what to prioritize on the over one. Okay. Okay, so, okay. So

[02:12:31] Chair Alison Hicks: that's my last question. And now we go to comments. Starting with whichever committee member wants to start coming. Committee, sir. No, I'll start coming.

[02:12:46] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: I just, I mean, I'm, I'm open to what committee members think I, As this comes back, I think it would be helpful to provide more clarity on the trade-offs that would need to be made if we were going to be pursuing as this comes forward. So, that, that's the only thing that I think would, would be important. And I, and I do feel, you know, I'm very grateful for the, for the public providing, um, the engagement both here in person virtually, but also over email and, um, people have been reaching out, um, quite a bit. And so it makes me feel heartened that we all have the same goal, which is to make, um, you know, our, our city street better for everyone. Um, I think they're also, I thought the survey results are also like quite interesting in that the greatest, um, you know, concern or response part was like traffic congestion, right? Um, I think that just kind of, to me, that shows a real need to mode shift, um, to be completely honest, um, to make it a corridor that is more both bicycle and pedestrian friendly. And so I struggled on trying to choose between, in particular alternative B and C, because our community has continuously asked us to make our city a more walkable, bikable city, especially as we're getting through what I'd call like major arteries within our city. How do we get north to south, but also east to west, which tends to be quite a pain point for our community. I think we really need to be thinking thoughtfully about that. Um, and I do feel and appreciate those, um, you know, talking about their experience, um, with their students or if they are a student, we don't want to come up with a, um, you know, safe route that people don't use because it's not safe. Right? So I think, um, those are just some of my initial comments as this, um, comes back, is I'd love for it to feel like there's alignment on the community feedback that we continually receive and where we've been wanting to go as a council. Thanks.

[02:15:07] Chair Alison Hicks: Okay, well, I've expected all that. I'm going to go before. Um, that's a member of McAllister. So, um, I, you know, really thank the community for all their valuable input, especially the people who've experienced being there and especially all the ideas about, um, the safe routes to school element, which I think is, um, one of the more important elements because they're not. I mean, to be honest with you, often, I would say. Maybe we should prioritize neighborhood streets. For as safe routes to school, but we can't always do that. So I think here we really do need to look at, uh, safe, safe bike safety. Um, and uh, for me, the trade-offs, I think that we are not at this point near, you know, this is not city central, so we don't need one thing that we can ditch is wider sidewalks. Um. And another thing is to look at the medium. Um, I think we don't need a 14 foot median that when, I looked at it. It doesn't, doesn't have, you know, like, really nice trees and so forth anyway. So, I think that gives some width with. Um. And then in addition to that, I liked some of the, like the, um, pictures of ball bouts rather than a, um, strip of, although I love planting strips, you know, here that might preserve some parking. And then I guess just looking at parking, you know, Where is parking most needed? I'm not, um, as enthusiastic about eliminating parking as I know some people are. I know that's a controversial subject, but, um, I do, you know, I know vulnerable members of our community who use parking too. Visit their elderly parents in Walnut Creek or, um, or, um, you know, they, they, they, uh, need to use a part because they're divorced and they have no control over where their kids go to, you know, live and go to childcare, et cetera, et cetera. There's some people who need cars. So I would like, um, You know, I would like some attention to that. I think we have to probably eliminate some parking, but do it, not, you know, do it with care and intention. Um, and then just put in as many green elements as possible. Um, You know, like I said, through bulbouts and so forth. And then I would also take the motion that the community members made under advisement. I think they put a lot of, there's a lot of detail in that. And I'm not saying that every, I know their trade-offs. And I'm not saying that every you'll be able to follow every one of those details, but I think it would be helpful to really take it seriously. Um. And then, I guess, I guess my last thing is, um, pay attention to where there's going to be densification, how that might, you know, particularly interface with, um, the housing element in Palo Alto, and how that, um, may impact, you know, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it will be downtown. And also, we have Charleston Plaza, which is, uh, you know, probably kind of develop and there's some similar developers working on those, so they're, and they're talking about people. Walking and biking and strolling their babies to daycare and so forth between those different developments. So, um, although I'm saying don't wind sidewalks. I, I make, I'm not on profit for it. Um. Okay, I think that's all my comments. And council member McAllister. Uh, chair,

[02:19:10] Committee Member John McAlister: your, your, uh, your questions and your comments were, uh, helpful for me to get where I want to get, so, when you were asking all those questions of trade-offs, but. Where I'm going to come from. Uh is I'm still big on transportation, moving people. This is a quarter that we need to maintain. We don't have that many, and as traffic goes, We still need those. The, uh, and that's my focus because. All the folks that we're today are speaking, uh, our great advocates are bike pet people. But they're only one group of city of Mountain View, and I got, we have to look at all the people, not everybody can ride the bike. Not everybody can walk. People need to take cars that are older. The population of Mount View is getting old. Demographics prove that this is good, oh, last is gone. So we always got to be conscious of how other people are gonna do it. We also be a kind of to be conscious, when BTA come along one time, and they mentioned cities like Mountain View. Have started doing things with the streets and they couldn't put in stops. So I was surprised to hear that. And I go, okay, we need to make sure that there are public spots for the buses to pick up public buses or shuttles. So if we're doing all this other stuff. How is the mass transit? And I'm a big believer in mass transit, getting people, or shuttles in town, all the other, the Ubers, all the small cars, they're going to be picking up people and they need people to do that. So, I'm concentrating on that. It's my overall big picture and then filtering down. Um, I believe that the quality of life for sound people, especially those parking. I've seen too much parking disappear in the city. And that's why I keep going back to the studies. Where's the data? How many people are actually using all this stuff at the time? And I don't see a lot of justification for against. What I did think about. Is like over at the school zone, so they have no parking. Morning or something like that. And I did look at the charts, and I did see a lot of red or, A lot of utilization of the parking on the charts that were here. But they were also time wise. I said, okay, maybe compromise. During the evening and weekends, they park during the day when people are riding the blacks. It could be a compromise and say, okay, there, and so we're, we're working with both people, so we maximize. So I see that's important. When you mentioned there's a lot of driveways and suffered. bike lanes. Look at El Camino. It's, rather, it's very confusing because there's a lot of, uh, driveways and there's a buffer here and a buffer there. And I would rather be consistent. I would like to be able to compromise. And say, reinforce or highlight the existing bike, Class 2 bike. Just as if we can do that and emphasize safety and still get the greenery in. Because if we do put all the bluffering in there, something has to go, but if we keep a butt, if we accentuate our existing bike lane. Not necessarily make it above her, but make it more. Noticeable, that we can accommodate some of those greenery items that are excellent shades and so forth going down that way. So uh, I'm looking at that. There was also, you were concerned about reducing speed. And I didn't ask, how are you going to reduce speed? Because if that's a major thorfer. We want to move traffic. We don't want people. If there's an event at the ring source center. You see the traffic backing ups down to almost El Camino because there's nowhere to go because the train. Now that will change when a grade separation comes along, that signal really backs up everything. So, that's important. I want to see how that's going to. So what else there? But that's, you know, if we're going to mix and match, but that's some of the thing we got to look. Well, that's pretty much the serve your 3 deals in there. Use the data, figure out where people are going, what time they're doing it. See what you can work around it. Uh. I love all right streets, but I agree with you, you know. And with people right now, if you look at bicycles, they're using sidewalks anyway. Wherever, yes. They're using a bicycle. So if they're using, I'll use a bicycle, sidewalk. I feel safe safer there, so I'll do that. Uh, but I don't want to, see if we can get a lesser bike lane, still have a continuous bike lane. Save the parking, concern about the traffic moving. And the signal. Oh, what? Well, synchronization?

[02:24:02] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: Oh, we need the same pronunination. Okay, that's good. I think I touched on everything

[02:24:10] Committee Member John McAlister: you certainly mentioned. Okay,

[02:24:13] Chair Alison Hicks: are we all going in the same direction or different directions? No,

[02:24:22] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: no, no, no, digest

[02:24:24] Chair Alison Hicks: it. Just digest it and come back. You have our.

[02:24:27] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: I think we need to. I think we need to. Tell you what we heard. We need to do active listening here. Okay.

[02:24:36] Transportation Planner Ahmed: I can start when I come and then Ryan and Jennifer. So I took away from the discussion that, um, alternative A is kind of our baseline, we want to see it, which is the intersection improvements. And for alternative companies, explore, if there are more ways we can put more bike protection either through narrow weight, sidewalk, and then also look at our parking study and identify where we are taking parking or keeping parking depending on usage. Um, I also heard looking at the school route for Los Altos, which is southern part of uh, the rainstorm and that intersection with El Camino, how they will work in terms of putting in a cross squat and the bike connection. Uh, densifying uh, densification uh, part of housing element that is going on. And, um, And time parking, uh, if possible, uh, based on our, based on our parking data, time parking wouldn't work for a protected biking because parking needs to be acceptable.

[02:25:53] Chair Alison Hicks: No, I didn't say protected bike.

[02:25:54] Transportation Planner Ahmed: But it's a kind of a bike lane. Today's cost too, but we can look into cost poverty. That's impossible, but um, That's

[02:26:04] Public Works Director Ng: when I heard a, um, comment about narrowing the medium. To gain space, yes. And so

[02:26:14] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: in terms of what I heard that was, I heard from all 3 of you. is a desire to be intentional if we were to remove parking or just keep parking. Desire to see more greenery. I heard from all 3 of you. Uh, I heard no sidewalk widening from, Two, maybe three? I did what? No,

[02:26:38] Committee Member John McAlister: because you're going to be giving away parking or something. And

[02:26:42] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: then San Francisco was mentioned by all of you was something we need to focus on. Um, I heard transit stuff specifically. Yes. Neither.

[02:26:50] Committee Member John McAlister: Um... Yeah. And I have one more. Okay, one more. Cost benefit.

[02:27:02] Unknown Speaker: Tell me more about how you want that cost benefit. Yep. Yeah,

[02:27:11] Caroline Horn: so, I mean, okay, everything is new. everything. Okay.

[02:27:15] Committee Member John McAlister: And if there's, you know, the trade-offs. I mean, we got so much the city needs to be. Black lanes, but for black lanes throughout the city, we would have great black lanes, but we would have a lot of congestion on the rest of the city. Deserting the greenery and parks, so. So if you look at a thing like you were talking about, you know, reducing the speeds or that, how are you gonna do that? So is that going to cost? I mean, lining the sidewalk, that's going to cost money. Buffer lanes, that's going to cost. I just look at, I mean, we're already gonna be deep in money in this, it's gonna take a lot to get this and go. But look at something that, actually, can get something accomplished. Sure said, the whining in the sidewalks, you know, that's not going to change that. So maybe don't even look at that. Because that's going to be a lot of money to do that. because the infrastructure of there, as the woman was mentioning, the utilities go through that. Well, make sure that we can justify that we're still keeping safe. Always keep them safe, but does it make sense? Yeah. Look at your professionalism. Yeah, with neutralized, because you got a lot of advocacy, and that we need you to make sure the choice of what. Looking at the big picture of the whole.

[02:28:35] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: One other item that I should have said in the commonalities. All of you mentioned improving like the life facilities in some way, some looking at how can we provide protected by ways for more and you're specifically talking about not protected by ways, but enhanced greening of the by ways. It's a part. Right.

[02:28:56] Chair Alison Hicks: So the council member committee wanting to make another.

[02:29:02] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Yeah, thanks, thanks chair. So um, just a quick question. So, you know, given the um, public transportation comments. So has committee member McAllister like brought this to BTA or I know that you sit on the board. So with their comments on our roots or?

[02:29:21] Committee Member John McAlister: So we're taking away parking. Yeah. That they're having trouble, you know, finding bus stops.

[02:29:28] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Okay. So maybe as this comes back, I would just, um, requests from staff that there be some, um, you know, in for more formal input from, from VTA on what their roots are going to be and what their services that they provide, if we're going to be asking for metrics as committee member McAllister likes, then it'd be great to know like their writership and their numbers as well on how they're best serving our residents along this route. And how maybe as other communities have looked at doing infrastructure improvements, they've been able to be a thought partner in that and implementing and making sure that it's successful. Thank you. You

[02:30:10] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: can absolutely do that. I have ETA. J. You

[02:30:16] Committee Member John McAlister: get the name because that's it. Yep. May

[02:30:21] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: I ask one more, just one more question because you brought it up as speed, and reducing speeds, and one of one of the, one of the thoughts was, um, there, there, there is speeding along corridor and certain locations at certain times, and how I, I'd like to know from the committee, on speed production strategies for.

[02:30:46] Committee Member John McAlister: I looked at the chart, and it was little bulbs, and its feeling was 35 and I saw 35, 37, 38, so that's. I don't think those, uh, it's going to really push the needle that you can find. Of course, but that's. I think the great cross, make sure the operation's gonna realize, see what's gonna happen. But that could speed up traffic. So, he'll he'll address it a different way. Yeah,

[02:31:18] Chair Alison Hicks: my, my comment on speed is that, um, I think at times when, as, as it densified, we have 2 fens, it, they densify, it probably will densify, but we're also gonna get, the great separation, should facilitate movement. So we have to. We don't know which of those forces will be predominant. But, um, I would suspect that during heavy commute times, for cars, that, uh, that there's not speeding. I mean, that's what I'm reading in your report, that there's not speeding, but that there's speeding at other times. So my, uh, my concern is that if they're a bicyclist in particular during non-commute times that we want to put out speeding during. I mean, we want, we don't want anyone like 50 miles an hour at any time, but I'm particularly concerned about those hours of the day. Um, and particularly because, uh, people coming home from school at 2 or 3, That's not during heavy commute times usually, so there may be speeding at that time. So I don't know if there's any strategies. You know, I think when everybody's, when there's a traffic jam, then you don't have to worry about the feeding. But, um, But at other times, I'd like to know what kind of strategies there. Yeah.

[02:32:46] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: And we've coalesced around. Okay,

5.2 Active Transportation Plan-Final

[02:32:54] Chair Alison Hicks: any last comments from committee members? Okay, if not, here, here. Don't have to. Um. So now we're gonna move to 5.2 was, which is the active transportation plan. I'm going to, because I think the thing that's most guring people from the public from, uh, contributing is, if you go all night, there are questions. No, I'm going to request that we continue allowing the public to speak before we speak. As Mr. McAllister, 1st uh, Mr. McCallister, 1st suggested. So, okay, we're on 5.2. It's the final active transportation plan. The staff presentation will be provided by Jennifer Luton. The 1st director at Lauren Ledbetter, transportation manager, Alison Boyer, assistant public works director, and Tracy McMillan, uh, from Nelson Nygard. Um, it will be available to answer questions after the presentations. So, presentation. I

[02:34:05] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: get to voted. All

[02:34:29] Public Works Director Ng: right, so I'm gonna kick us off. Good evening again, Jennifer Ink, the 1st director, um, ATP presentation. As employers, as the public works director is calling in from my home group. And next to me is for a living. Pick flight, please. So a quick overview of where we're going today in our agenda. I'll start by walking through the project background and how the plan was developed. Um, Lauren will talk about uh, outreach and what we've done for the project before moving into the components of the plan itself. And then she'll walk through the comments we received on draft plan and how they have been addressed in the final plan. And then I'll walk through next and implementation of the HP. Next flight, please. We can skip this one. Um. So the origin of the Mountain View active transportation plan is that in 2020, council directed staff to integrate and update both the 2014 pedestrian master plan and the 2015 bicycle master plan, um, to get the transportation plan together into one combined document, which is now called the active transportation plan. And in creating this plan, the council recognized that the public right of way needed even reviewed as a whole system and not as a discrete pedestrian only or bicycle only plan, which is what we had previously. Um, and that recognizing each of these components in the public right away don't act singularly, but they act as a system. So the active transportation plan that you have before each night focuses on people powered modes of transportation. A firm that I made up. So essentially walking, biking, and rolling, and it sets a vision for how we want these improvements to be refined and implemented over the next couple of decades. So this plan, the active transportation plan, set for long range vision, while still recognizing that are already built infrastructure, such as, you know, valued infrastructure, like mature trees, are part of what gives mountain view its character. Find. Um, so this plan, again, is a long range plan, and by that, I mean like 20 plus years to complete. pretty ambitious. And it sets a vision for the future of walking and bicycling and rolling in our city. And the long range visionary documents, it's a foundation to guide our staff and our projects moving into the future. So the recommendations that we have for you tonight stem from data and directly from the community. The plan does 3 things. It identifies projects, but it also outlines policies and programs for the city to undertake to promote, Walking bicycling and rolling in the city. And we also consider the city sustainability goals through inclusion of green street infrastructure. This plan builds on previous plans local to map review, including, as I mentioned before, previous pet and bike plans, precise plans and other planning documents, regional and state plan information were also incorporated. And because the transportation system has overlap with sustainability in green streets. Those plans were also built upon. Public right of way is a common connector across the whole city and therefore has a lot of overlap with just about every other planet we have. The intent of this act of transportation plan is to not hold all of the previous plans into one giant and ginormous document. But instead, the ATP, or MV ATP is requiring it here, will act as a compliment to other plans that we already have. So where we're at now, this plan, as you know, has taken a while to complete. We wanted to make sure that we had appropriate communication and collaboration with all interested parties all along the way. You can see on this slide that the plan was developed through a multi-year process and there were several community and council took points throughout. Um, the review of the plan along the way included technical analyses, extensive community engagement, interdepartment, collaboration, and community input as educated by the blue arrow at the bottom was collected throughout. And there were several midpoint touch points with the city council. As a plan progressed. Staff provided updates and requested feedback from various decolders and committees. And now we're in the final stages of the project. So a public review draft plan was released in April of this year. And we solicited feedback from the public. The bicycle pit advisory committee and the CTC. There's been a lot of feedback provided to us along the way both from the community and the BPAC and CTC committees. As we go through this presentation. I hope you'll be able to see how we thoroughly and thoughtfully incorporated these comments into the document. And so the final plan has been edited to respond to those comments and we're here before you tonight, hoping to get a recommendation, which will lead into, um, taking this to council. Uh, in September. And I'm gonna toss the ball now to work.

[02:39:48] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: Got it. Thank you very much. So I'll start with the public and stakeholder engagement. Go to the next slide, Laura. Thank you. Um, we work with 4 stakeholder groups throughout the development of the plan. The 1st 2 groups were developed specifically to guide the ATP. They are the technical advisory committee, which was an internal advisory committee, comprised of 13 staff members from public works, community services, fire, and community development departments, and from the city manager's office. We also convened an external facing active transportation public advisory committee called AtPac. And that was comprised of representatives from 12 community-based organizations, nonprofit entities, or advisory bodies, and representative from the Ballet Transportation Authority. The other 2, of course, of the city is standing up. But everybody's, the feedback. But We engage the public throughout the development of the plan. We used a multilingual approach with materials in English, Spanish, Chinese, and Russian in translation and interpretation services for key events. We used a variety of community engagement techniques to receive input and better understand walking and biking experiences in Mountain View, including that in walking and biking tours focused on vulnerable users and challenging areas. A multilingual online map-based survey with 655 respondents used to identify favorite areas and challenges. Target small group, multilingual meetings to reach under representative communities. And we looked at roughly 3 years of public feedback from the city's ask MV platform and solicited comments on the public review draft plan to collaborate and be this past spring, as Jennifer mentioned earlier. Maybe engagement information was used as one of the 17 criteria we used to prioritize project locations. And we also looked at individual comments when we were developing potential, um, concept ideas for those digits. So you go to the next slide. In terms of what we heard, the key themes we heard from the community are listed here. Strong support for trails and bikeways. The major streets are both key routes that people need and want to travel along, but also they are barriers. There's a need for safer crossings, improvements in intersections and flower driver speeds. And we learned throughout that walking and biking are everyday transportation. People are just going for recreational rides or recreational walks. They're also walking and biking to work. To school and for errands. Go the next five. So a walk through the contents of the plan that were presented tonight. Can you go to the next slide? It, we did not restructure the plan for the last time you saw. It's the same structure as the public review draft plan we presented in June. There's 4 chapters, the introduction introduces the plan, describes how we develop it, summarizes the public and stapholder engagement, and outlines the vision statement and guiding principles. Chapter 2 is essentially existing conditions. It gives an overview of the community, the demographics, the travel patterns, the infrastructure. And it also provides the holistic network maps for pedestrians and bicycling. Chapter 3 is the recommendations. This highlights current, uh, ongoing actions in Mountain View and recommends projects, programs, policies. Walking and biking and rolling. Chapter 4 is the let's roll. It's the recommendation today. or the implementation chapter. In this plan, we discuss considerations for phasing the projects, the cost and benefits of green street infrastructure, funding, and the enforced collaboration and commitment. Plan is also supported by 5 appendices. There's a project prioritization, which outlines the process and the criteria we use to identify the priority corridors, the foot sheets, which provide concept designs for the priority projects, the recommended improvements appendix, which is a table of all the recommendations for bikeways, sidewalks, and crossing improvements, uh, not just the priority, um, projects. We've added a vision 0 action plan, local roadway safety plan, appendix outlining the policies and programs that are contained in that plan because there's a lot of overlap between that plan and this plan. And we also added the existing conditions report. from the, uh, that was presented to be back in 2023. As November. I'm going to the next five. So I'll walk you for the next few slides. I walk you through some of the key highlights of the plan. The vision was brought to the B pack, the CTC, and the council, and it reflects those bodies input. You can see it here. The plan is guided by 5 principles, which support council strategic priorities. Mobility and connectivity is streets that are easy use and well connected for walking, biking, and rolling, safety and comfort, trail sidewalks, bikeways, intersections, and crosswalks that are safe, inviting, and easy to use. Access and equity, policies and programs that engage and protect vulnerable populations and increase mobility choices. Sustainability and biodiversity, green streets that improve access to nature and open spaces, while promoting sustainability via native habitats and storm water management and action oriented and forward thinking. An implementable plan with clear standards that are updated in a lot of adopted policies. The next slab. So the data in the community input show that Mountain View is already an active community. The residents want access to key destinations, but there are challenging areas for walking and biking. There are opportunities to fill gaps in the networks, to improve the quality of the infrastructure, to increase connectivity across the city and enhance safety and comfort, comfort and support long-term sustainability. Part of the existing conditions assessment, we develop holistic maps. That show all planned, proposed an existing bike, pet infrastructure in the city. These maps are intended to show the overall network the city is working toward. They allowed us to identify gaps in that network. And they're used as a reference for staff in our viewing private development projects. The, This is uh, this map shows the holistic bike network map with the priority projects outlined in black, if you can see, it's 2 parallel black lines. Um, overall, the plan recommends, uh, a little bit over 10 miles of class one shared views path, almost 5 miles, bike lanes, which could include buffer bike lanes, 4 miles, class 3 bike route, and approximately 20 miles of what we're calling class 3 B, essentially bicycle boulevards. And 22 miles of class 4 separated bike waves. I note that with the bicycle boulevards, these could be considered in the future for treatments to turn them into slow, slow streets, at least some of them could be shadows for that. For the next line. In terms of pedestrian improvements. Again, we built off prior planning work. And identified gas in the sidewalk network, and identified property improvements. The plan recommends 30 crossing improvements. The same 10 miles of shared use paths that I mentioned on the slide before. About 5.5 miles of sidewalk widening, new sidewalk on one side for about one. 6 miles and a small segment of new sidewalk on both sides. I know that we have updated the math and some of the narrative and the plan to indicate that sidewalk widening they can spot improvements. based on the recognition that sometimes the sidewalk lining area is not, um, sufficient drive away to do that for the whole life. So we use the guiding principles to prioritize projects and identify a subset of priority projects, which will be the city's near term form focus. The scoring criteria you see here or reviewed in a by city council, CTC, and BPAT. For the criteria directly measure the guiding principles, and a 5th criteria feasibility was added at the request of city council, CTC. These criteria are supported by 17 metrics, um, that measure objective data or community comments, or use professional judgment to make the measurements. We grouped bicycle and pedestrian improvements into divine capital projects. We looked at more than a 100 of these, and scored them against these criteria, and you can see the priority projects that we identified or shown here on this map. So the plan also includes more than 20 policy or program recommendations that the city can undertake for better support walking and biking. Um, they include continuation of existing efforts, such as continuation of uh, road safety education, expansion of existing efforts, including expansion of safe routes to school program to safe routes of parks, to trans and transit, New efforts, including updated design standards, and developing and reporting and performance metrics for the ATP expectation. Some of the projects and sorry, the policies and programs we received a lot of support for was establishing a note right on red policy pilot. Uh, I mentioned updating the city design standards and also updating the bicycle party standards, all of which are in the plan. So once we had identified the priority project locations, we developed specific recommendations for concepts for those corridors in developing the recommendations. Staff looked at field visits and conducted fields that they look at all the locations. We looked at the curve, the current web, the lanes, configuration, the width, the sidewalk, the speed limits, the average daily traffic, the surrounding land uses, the community concerns, and we brought these concepts to internal review, uh, to the internal attack, and include, which included, of course, traffic engineering and civil engineering groups. We also looked at precise plan, the corridor studies that included, um, specific recommendations for some of these areas. And we did not include separate, um, concept plans or cut sheets for the priority projects that actually already had a future concept developed through an already developed. You can go to the next page. In the implementation chapter, we developed 2 phasing options with priority corridors. There's the resurfacing, which could be considered a shorter term approach, which looks at, considers routine maintenance and what could be incorporated into that in order to accommodate bicyclists of pedestrians. This could include pavement parking, signage, elements of class 4 bikeways. It assumes no curb line changes and no major civil work. Um, the 2nd option would be a longer term option and this would be reconstruction. This could include full demolition and rebuild the roadway. It allows curb line adjustments. We did assume, however, that there's no additional right of way acquisition. The implementation chapter also includes the discussion of green streets, the materials and costs, the benefits and trade-offs, and the implementation strategies. We developed, um, I also want to point out in appendix B, we have concept designs for refurposing reconstruction, you can see an example how they look like to the right. Go to the next one. We also include a non-exhaustive list of potential funding sources for these projects, and we include a discussion of the need to collaborate with Caltrans VTA, the county. deliver keys, not that project. We can go to the next section. Um, so I'm going to talk about how we address the comments that we received on the public draft plan. So the last time we came to this committee was soon. We had just finished the, uh, we were great at the after the public review period. They have received comments and feedback. Comment, and I thought... We received more than 200 comments, actually nearly 300 comments on the top of her craft. And I should go to that slide. These are the themes that came out from those comments. Desire to increase the programs and policies, strengthen pedestrian focus, um, improve consistency, highlight, sustainability, biodiversity, and a desire for us to add performance metrics or add the, um, policy that we would develop performance metrics and report annually on plan progress. So the next, I believe, 2 slides, those 3 more specifically how we address those large comment themes. Uh, and then I will follow with some slides that address specific planets from the station. So, um, to address, uh, we had a desire for additional round of review by the BPAC and the CPC. We went to APAC 2 weeks ago and we were not coming to CTC. We strengthened the programs and policies section. We added new policies, and we, in that section, we also added, um, policy, program sort of cut sheets with more detail and more information about specific policies and programs. We also, as I mentioned earlier, added a new appendix that includes the non-infrastructure recommendations from the Vision Zero Active uh action plan. To increase the pedestrian focus on the improvements in the plan. We updated the narrative and maps to better highlight. No, forward. Thank you. Okay. Um. And the greater consistency, that was, uh, that was mostly, uh, ensuring that the, the cut sheets in the appendix for the priority projects were internally consistent. We did that. You can go to the next slide. We added in order to highlight the role in advancing sustainability, we added additional information to the green streets section. And we modified the project cut sheets. I highlight how proposed improvements align of sustainability and biodiversity. Um, we also, for the performance metrics, added a policy to develop and report on football metrics, you can go to the next slide. So. The next. 3 slides outline how we addressed the comments we received from this body. I does, these 3 sites do not include the clarifying questions that we've received from this committee, just comments that, uh, we believed required an action to adjust the plan. So there was a desire to strengthen the language in the implementation chapter, to describe how we coordinate various agencies. We, And we increased the language in the plan, um, talking about the need to coordinate with Caltrans, the county, BTA, and neighboring jurisdictions. And you can see, I've put on the slide the locations and what we did. There was a question about Carroll Avenue sidewalk construction, and is that proposal, which is in the appendix in the back? Was it formally unincorporated county and why are we proposing to construct a sidewalk here? The recommendation did come from several points of community input and the desire to provide more access to the school. We confirm that Carroll Avenue is covered under the unimproved streets policy, which means the city would not move forward with improvement on there, um, unless the, uh, residents work. form, uh, method to pay for it. And we also added a footnote to Appendix C where Carroll Avenue. It's noted to reference the unapproved streets policy. You can go to the five. In the implementation chapter, there was a request to strengthen the existing language on how the city will speak public input, and we added a section public input to the implementation chapter. It's 3 paragraphs long, so it's a pretty significant. Edition. There was a request to acknowledge the rise of e-bikes. Uh, we added a sentence to, to the, to reference the ongoing e-bike safety training or the soon to the ongoing e-bike safety training in the what's working section, under safety to school, and we know that we do reference bikes in policy, education and enforcement on use of personal electric mobility devices. And then finally, Oh no, there's one more slide after this. Sorry. There was a significant amount of discussion about Latham Street, and specifically the recommendation that the, The plan had to widen the cycle of something. So I'm concerned that that would potentially result in mature treaties being. So we revised the narrative for length of cut sheets to indicate that the sidewalk widening may be spot improvements. Not the full length and we noted that the city's intention is to retain the mature trees. We also added a disclaimer on all the maps, sidewalk, that had sidewalk widening shown, that the winding could be spot improvements. So this would apply not just to lay them. But all the projects that include potential sidewalk light. Go to the next slide. Um, there was a suggestion um, that wider sidewalks should be considered where densification is planned to accommodate future pedestrian activity. So in the new design standards fallout that we added to the plan. It includes a reference to developments constructing adequate pedestrian infrastructure, and we also added a section in the implementation chapter. Private development in the MBAPP to note how the ATP would coordinate with private development. We, there was a request to describe how this plan and other city plans will coordinate, specific, uh, on policies and projects, and we added a call out of greening and tree canopy improvements. Uh, we added an appendix on patient zero, as I mentioned before, and we expanded the narrative and exit, get somewhere to reference these various plans. So, I know this is a lot, it's like. But that was the end of the CTV comments. Everything that I have indicated. is in the plan that you see here today. We then, as you know, went to... Um, and

[02:59:21] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: more. It's also a rank story. It's everything. Yeah. It's it's the CTC thing. Yeah, this is the holy area right here. Um, So, as you know, we uh, went to BPAC in August, you can go to the next line. So I'm going to walk you through. We have heard additional comments from VPAC and from council members since we put together the plan that you see in this packet. So I'm gonna walk you through those. Um, the BPAC moved to recommend the plan for adoption by the city council unanimously and requested modifications, which I've listed here. Um, updating a photo, uh, language around the, thoughts on the, on the delivery bots, Using language that references all ages and ability, uh, applies to both pedestrians, bicyclists. Um, and some of that language is in table 6 where we recommend improvements instead of just showing protected interceptions. We, there's a request to have them stay protected and enhanced, so that it is not just exclusive to improvements for bicyclists. Um, There's a request to add a statement or a few sentences in the implementation section about implementing smaller scale obstruction projects to improve safety. There was a specific request for us to note or highlight on the maps. The intersections of El Camino, Real, and Reichdorf, and El Camino Real, and showers, as intersections that should be improved. I know that both of those intersections are located within Los Altos, not within Mountain View. But we do, um, can have a role in coordinating with Caltrans and that, that, the town of Los Altos to help make improvements on those. And then a request to add the Los Alfos schools to the maps. So staff do recommend, I believe we can, we recommend making all of these improvements or changes. So,

[03:01:26] Committee Member John McAlister: the B-Pack once or the next slide. All

[03:01:29] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: of them, I'll walk you through them. There's okay. So that was the beatpack improvements. And then, um, he offered council briefings at the beginning of August, 2 council numbers. And, um, We have a few slides of additional modifications to recommend, be able to include in the plan. Um, and then, and we'll get to the end of the motion, but what we're asking is for this uh, committee to move the plan for adoption with the staff recommended modifications. So that's starting right here on this slide. So the 1st one is incorporate the VPAC requested changes. Um, based on comments and questions we received from city, from this, this group and and um, also council, we reviewed all of the priority projects, the specific recommendations, and we recommend based on that review, one project, to change the recommendation for the Danish street project, which currently recommends class 4 bikeways, between Bush and Warpark. We recommend modifying that so that between Bush and Calderon, it is a bicycle boulevard and not plasformic ways. And then the next 3 bullets are not changes to what's recommended, but it is adding language to the narrative to clarify. So Whisman Road, the resurfacing alternative. Uh, recommends uh, removing a lane of travel to provide class 4 bike ways. We recommend adding to that the traffic study will be necessary to evaluate feasibility. For California Street between shoreline and showers, that, of course, is the segment that has the pilot going on right now. We recommend a note that says the final design will perform our results, the pilot project evaluation. And then another section of California Street, Shoreline Boulevard to Bush Street, so in the downtown area. Um, the map shows uh, wider class 2 bike lanes up to Hope Street. The narrative, though, says that it's the whole length, and so we just want to correct the narrative. To note that the wider class 2 bike lens would only be, uh, West of Hope Street. And you can go to the next slide. So we also recommend adding numbers to the graphic scale in the legend for all, uh, maps that have heat maps. For the no right turn on red policy, which is on page 48. We recommend modifying that, that um, description. So that a pilot of this would be at selected the patients and or specific times were adding underlined. And then a request for table 7, which is the recommended policies and programs, which is approximately more than 20, there was a request to make it, uh, reorganized, so it's easier to read and also, in the plan, add information on the relative level of effort required for these programs and policies, the relative cost. Whether they are existing expanded or new efforts. And whether, uh, it's a one off item or an off-line effort. And more specifically, the request is to add qualitative metrics to these programs and policies, so that they were easy to, just easier to distinguish between it. So staff, develop those um, qualitative, those metrics that we believe, we can't put together without too much additional. effort or time. You go to the next slide. Forward. Okay. So in, We also, um, the following ones are more, um, corrections, rather than they're not changing any full recommendations, corrections. So in, um, Appendix B, which has the priority project touch sheets, there's a table in there that lists the, the priority projects in the order in which they ranked. And We recommend adding in a project that was in the top list, but didn't get added to, it was admitted, um, inadvertently from this table. Now that doesn't change the priority projects because we are not including projects on on El Camino or on Caltrans right of way. as projects that the city would consider priority projects, because we would have to, um, We would instead work with health traps to make improvements on there, but it's important for us to highlight that that segment is an important segment to work with healthtrans on. And so, There's another, El Camino Around segment in that table. This one was inadvertently admitted. And we have some additional minor tech corrections. You can go to the next slide. So, similarly, we recommend on the priority map, to highlight the 2 segments of El Camino real that did score in the top 20, but aren't considered city led priority products, and add an item to the legend that denotes them as important quarters for coordination. We also want to note on the maps, all of the maps that El Camino Real and Central Expressway are owned by Cal Transit County, respectively. And then, um, we had some minor, uh, changes we were going to recommend to make it easier to, uh, increase the list. So, on the holistic bicycle map where you see the priority projects outlined in black. We want to similarly add the 2 segments of El Camino, as I mentioned earlier, and update the legend, so that we, you know, cryptos are important to coordinate with. And California Street and Latham Street, our priority projects. California has a long-term proposal, even though it's implemented right now as a pilot. And Latham Street has a proposal to implement, hydrate, um, The bike boulevard. And so we would like to add those to the map to make the map consistent with the table on the sheets. You can go to the next slide. That's it. I know that was a lot and um, I think we can probably walk, you know, um, there's more, there's, I want to hand it over to Jennifer, or. So

[03:08:46] Public Works Director Ng: I'm gonna pick up from here and if we go to the next slide, we can see a timeline since, uh, basically this spring. Um, where we're at is the 2nd to the last of blue. Tangle. I guess I'll call it, uh, the CTC meeting. So we've used the summer to incorporate all of our comments received, um, and did a draft final essentially of the ATP. Uh, we're still gathering data between the BPAC meeting that just happened and the CTC meeting that will happen tonight. Um, and we're hoping to get recommendation for council approval to take it to the council on the 22nd of September. Slide. So just wrapping up where we're at with implementation, um, I mentioned earlier, there's 3 main buckets, I'll say, of this, uh, plan, policy program and priority project on the policy side. We have the standard details update underway. Uh, we can start looking at a pilot program and development for criteria for when no ride on red would be appropriately deployed at signalized intersections. There are several guiding policy statements. Included within the ATP, as well as coordination with other plants, one more slide. On the program side, we want to report out yearly to the BPAC starting next fall, so that's fall of 2027. We'll develop reporting metrics over the next year. And then some of our program goals include expansion of safe routes to school, as well as looking at pedestrian paseos and connectors through private development projects. And then we've already talked quite a bit about the top 20 priority projects, but the goal is to add these to the CIP as there's opportunities and resource availability. Each project will need to start with a validation step. So the question to be asked during validation is, Is our vision in this plan still what is needed? Things change over time. This is, as I mentioned earlier, a long range vision anticipated to take at least a couple of decades. And this will allow us to keep current as we proceed forward with the individual projects. And then the good news with projects is that we've got a head start with several projects underway. I'll just um quickly list them, California complete streets pilot project. Um, we're doing the post construction. Let's survey now. Middlefield Complete Streets is underway. You recently saw that at Council in June. Miramonte Avenue is um, under construction and under design for 2 different segments. Brainstorff we just finished talking about quite a bit. Um, and Evelyn Avenue, streets we recently got funding for, and so we'll take that off soon. And so the next slide is our recommendation. Or what we hope to get from you tonight is a recommendation that the city council adopt the final Mountain View active transportation plan, inclusive of the staff recommended modifications. And that concludes staff presentation. Um, Lauren's happy to answer questions. Yeah, Okay. Thank you very much. So,

[03:12:01] Chair Alison Hicks: now we're going to uh, again, kind of switch what we usually do and take public comment 1st. So are there any? I see the public spinned out a little. Um, are there any, uh, I guess there are members of the public, uh, in, in person who want to comment and please state your name first.

[03:12:24] William Adler: Excuse me, thank you Just getting hear my bedtime.

[03:12:29] Chair Alison Hicks: Excuse

[03:12:29] William Adler: me. My name is William Adler. Uh, I'm a retired corporate attorney, I'm a 30 year resident of Mountain View. Um, we have lived in the same house at Sullivan Park. Uh, for all of those 30 years. Uh, what got me interested in this because I know I'm a daily mid dollar short here. But uh, what got me interested in this was actually the appendix is not the main part of it. When I saw the dams that was going to be done to my lovely street, so I don't know. Um The plan reflects a prodigious effort. And kudos are doing, really, yes. quite a bit of work, quite a, a coffee has a thing. But as I was reading it, I kept thinking to myself, what am I missing? Uh, the terminalistic issues, I may not know how it's used correctly, but I don't see how. It could be holistic when it completely ignores the, um, Vehicle transportation part of the city that we did, but. Um, I think I'll just read this, if you know, fine. Excuse me, I'm a little bit horse. Biking and walking and the and the rolling have to coexist. Of course. And other vehicles off the street. There's nothing in the plan that I saw that indicates that's an important consideration. Or that, that would be part of a holistic plan, which I think would really work holistic plan. Uh, the numbers that the plan gives us show us that fewer than 10% of our Mountain View residents are passing through used bikes or pedestrians, which means over 90% have to travel like vehicle, and they don't have a choice. We're talking about people that have to work, that people that have to get to school, that take their kids to school, which unfortunately, not who doesn't have buses, which, in itself, is kind of a shame, or scandal to me from where I came from. Um. So, a lot of, uh, a lot of regardless to what will be, what's going to happen with these little transportation when you do this. Um, No amount of study. Uh, in some cases, there's wishful thing, even, no amount of study, or anything proposed in the plan, can convert Mountain View from a small, sprawling suburban city, with no central cord, something it's not, an urbanized area. Uh, that can support alternative uh, mobility. Uh, or residents just have no alternative. Uh, the other thing that struck me about reading this is that Mountain View isn't really an island itself. Uh, we've got 100s of not 1000s of people driving through and around Mountain View every day, from all ours, of surrounding communities. Um, their needs have to be taken into account in petition, certainly not the highest priority, perhaps, bacon. Um, These workers have to get to work. They have to find a place to bar. As we well know, there's some difficult areas in the city park for people doing construction jobs, including one right now in my neighborhood. Um. But the appendices, I think, is the things that bother me the most. Uh, I think it undertook too much. Uh, and too soon. Uh, especially, uh, when I saw the one about my seat, my street, as I mentioned, so. A lot of these things, um, seem to fall into a category of, um, or should be in a category of 1st do no harm. Uh, because a lot of them would indicate to me. That projects would be undertaken at a great expense. The time and disadvantage the drivers. Oh, but I think ultimately, um, to cancel, you know, advice, to limit proposed findings. based on the plan to improving, um, gesturing of medical safety. But without significant physical changes to the roses rates. Thank you.

[03:16:38] Chair Alison Hicks: Thank you. Okay. Okay. Hi,

[03:16:48] Valerie Fenwick: uh, Valerie Fennick, uh, Rex Manor, um, nearly 30 year resident of the city of Mountain View. Um, I, I'm not speaking on behalf of my employer nor the performing arts committee. I was formerly a member of VPAC and part of the ATPAC as well, and I'm very happy to see this come to fruition. In fact, council years ago, we're complaining about, about the pedestrian master plan, because we weren't making changes to it, because the ATP was promised around the quarter. That's probably been about 7 years, so I'm really happy to see this come. I think it's really important. I think, um, I, I'm very happy with all the, the changes that you've incorporated based on the, and CTC feedback. I think we can continue to go further and really closing those sidewalk gaps. Um, I know we are in urban sprawl, we are, um, but this is what we have, right? We have, um, so in particular, like I look at places like Bright Avenue, we have a swim school, next to a ballet school, with 35 mile per hour curbs, which means people can drive. That's what the curb tells you how fast you go around the corner. And those are, between, that's on Polaris Avenue, right? Uh, And there's no sidewalk in front of the ballet school. And the city has said they'd be looking at it and like things like this would be a, would be a quick build. This is a very wide street. It's not an arrow street, according to city survey. So it's about a 60 foot wide street. Plenty of room put in a sidewalk. I know the business technically owns it, but come on, we can do better, and I think this plan encourages us to do better as a city, uh, to close those gaps wherever we can. Like even with the last project. Maybe we can't get a perfect bike laying the whole way up and down rank store, but where we can do it, let's do it. Um, I disagree about the sidewalks not being quote unquote being wide enough. Try doing it in a wheelchair, mobility device, with a walker. Um, try pushing your mother in a wheelchair on some of these sidewalks where you have a telephone pole a little bit, or a no parking sign or a sometimes parking sign. Um, the city likes to put those things and PGE likes to put those in our sidewalks. It makes them inaccessible, um, things that are called out here specifically, um, about, and also called in some, kind of, earlier about having directional crosswalks, directional curb cuts. So people with low vision, or who are blind, who are relying on dogs or other systems to get them correctly across the street can do so safely. I mean, this is really about uploading how, you know, our vision 0 plans. And I relate to people who say, but don't impact traffic. I think we can be smart and we can come up with some quick builds and having this plan is our guiding light, it's going to help us do that in the future. So thank you so much for your consideration. And all the many years of staff and counts and beat pack and AT pack effort. Thank you.

[03:19:51] Chair Alison Hicks: Hi,

[03:19:51] Mary Dateo: Mary Datio. Um, I also wanted to thank, um, dad and council members for the amount of time that's gone into this project. It's um, exciting to see that it's finally here and they're going to start implementing it. I'm, um, especially, uh, one of the things I think that excites me a lot is that, um, not sure I've got the right name of it, but that there are going to be design standards for safety, that are going to be developed. Um, so that every time we have new projects. We don't have to reinvent the wheel, that we have an accepted way to make sure that, uh, that things are done. Same way every time and in a way that's going to encourage safety for vitalist pedestrians. Um, I am hoping that those include, Um, best practices too for, Um, encouraging drivers to respect the speed limits. So I'm not saying slow the drivers down, but I'm saying that someone in their wisdom has set limits on roads. And um, that I'd like to see drivers drive those speed limits. So, for example, I live next to Costa. And, uh, frequently, cars drive by at 45 miles an hour, went to speed at 11, that's 35. Um, there's a park right there and it's on St. Rob's to school that it's pretty scary. So again, um, narrower, Traffic lanes, ecourge slower driving, so that type of thing. So I'm hoping we can see that and um, uh, I think actually, people are all respecting student limits that actually makes traffic flow more smoothly and so throughput will be higher. Um, Again, um, uh, really looking forward to, um, all the projects that are, that are, uh, going to look forward as a result of this. Thank you.

[03:21:53] Chair Alison Hicks: Yep. Oh,

[03:22:01] Serge Bonte: my name is Stewart Self-Bones. I'll be back. I'll be speaking on myself. So, I didn't have to recuse myself from that agenda item at the BPAC meeting, so I wanted to thank staff to incorporate, you know, tiny but still, uh, important medication suggested, uh, uh, I wanted to highlight, um, the addition of the highlighting of the 2 intersections that, um, uh, rank staff and El Camino as well as powers and El Camino. So there was a lot of talk about that intersection at Reinstorf. So that's that's one that has crosswalk only on one side. That's part of the side for out to score, that's also, uh, you need to process that, you know, to go get the bus. Uh, and it's kind of, you know, that's a, a bus route that has actually has pretty decent ridership as far as. Ridership, video, or ship goes. Um, and the same is true for showers. Uh, and El Camino. There is also a crosswork only on one side. Uh, the, the, the bus up there is actually the most. The bus stop with the most ridership in mountain view, so that it's actually pretty important. I know that that's controlled by at least on a map by Los Altos. But more permanently, let's control that guy trans. So, you know, it's not going to be fun to work with them and things like this, but these are important in that sections. Um, and, you know, um, The sections of um, that are covered by Los Altos, uh, Catherine's was able to put bike lines there. Los Altos just said, okay, do like Mountain View and Things like this. I don't think they'll be ready, big barrier to this. As long as they're not being on doing their work, but it's... Thank you.

[03:24:00] Chair Alison Hicks: Thank you.

[03:24:04] Unknown Speaker: Everybody, present has spoken. Are there virtual speakers? You hear me? Yes. Okay. Um,

[03:24:19] Public Speaker: I want to start off by giving a huge thank you to staff, and I wrote this in a letter that um, a couple of organizations sent in. Um, they, in the last round of um, feedback, they have done a really good job in integrating that. They've added in information about recomplete streets and gone down into some sort of, you know, some detail. They included the existing conditions report from 2023 that was a draft and included, um, at least some of the details from the, um, for standard details that need to be improved. Um, there are a few others. I'll get to that. But I just wanted to, you know, huge thank you. It's really appreciated by the community. I think the others said that. Um, I don't usually speak about this, but I also want to respond briefly to the idea that bicycle advocates comments should be discounted because you hear from us repeatedly. Um, I don't know that anyone in this group is a professional advocate. I'm not a professional advocate. Um, I'm here. Most of us are like living and trying to move around in a system that doesn't work for us, system that doesn't think about us. It hasn't for years, it's not designed for us. We maybe have like, 15% of the road. It's dangerous and it's hostile. Um, and that's why you don't see us in a lot of places, like rank store. And the people you do see are usually pretty stubborn. Um, and, you know, they go through it, but most of us don't have a death wish. And, um, you know, I'm also here because I'm a systems analyst, and because the system isn't working for us, I really like to do a deep dive, um, I also am a usability analyst, and I care about the policy and design. So, when I'm here so much and talking about it, it's because I care a lot about it. I like to understand what's going wrong and why I don't have space on the road and I have friends who are hit. I've had near misses. It's really dangerous out there. So I just wanted to set that. And then also the, you know, transportation system has prioritized motor vehicles for years. It's funding. It's the entire system is set up to fund that. So that's the perspective that we're coming from. Now, in terms of the active transportation plan, as I mentioned, it's like high level, it's in really good shape, and I think at this point we're at the fine tuning stage. And what I've sent in comments about, and a letter and what I would like to look at, um, is the policies that you have in programs. And I think there's some things that we could do that would provide a lot of benefit. Um, and one of that is how do we handle shorter term projects that are more cost effective? I think this would appeal to council member McAllister. and easier to do and quicker to do. And so one of those things is like a program for delivering these small scale safety projects in more proactive way. I think they can partner very nicely with our traffic calming program. Um, and we can use different elements. We don't have to use the plastic. It can be green. Someone talked about pedestrians. I think we should have a pedestrian program. And then finally, for the standard details, there were a number of ones that specific ones that were missed. I have listed them. Please take a look. Thank you so much. Thank you. The

[03:27:22] Unknown Speaker: next virtual speaker. What? What? Are you there?

[03:27:30] Cliff Chambers: I'm here. Clip Chambers, resident of Mountain View. Uh, 1st off, I really want to give staff kudos. I've never seen such an excellent public engagement process as this planning process, it's been long, but I don't think anybody can possibly say they didn't have the opportunity to speak up. You can look at all the survey data, all the outreach, you get an A plus for that effort, and it's very much appreciated. I also really appreciate the transparency of how you've responded to comments, and I would say many of the comments that I made have been successfully responded to. But there are a few that I'd like to point out for, that were not included as, uh, on, on the comments received. First, several times I've advocated for having modal objectives for bicycle and pedestrian increases as a percentage of travel as aspirational goals. And it's not in there. We're spending a lot of money if the plan is actually implemented, we should know what we're reaching for in terms of the percentage of bicyclists and pedestrians. Greenhouse gas emissions are 60% of our uh, carbon footprint in Mountain View increasing bicycles and pedestrian usage will only help. So I would like to see that. I am very, the only thing I'm really disappointed in in this plan right now is, there was the advocacy, and you mentioned the performance metrics, you've adopted a policy to develop this over the next year. We need to have a feedback loop that can be used now. I'm really disappointed that it's not part of the plan. We need to know and evaluate before different projects are done. I would really like to see the performance metrics developed as part of it. The other shortfall, I feel, is that now that the biodiversity plan has come out and the parks and recreation strategic plan, there's not enough integration. For example, we had advocated for targeting, increased tree canopy to make walking more pleasant. I walk a lot and there's a lot of areas that could really use tree canopy. I think that's a shortfall in in the plant. Also on the middle field complete streets. There was discussions about the part-time, bike lanes are extremely dangerous. I live on Middlefield Road. It's incredibly dangerous and accidents waiting to have. As a policy, the council needs to eliminate these part-time bike lanes. Thank you very much. Thank you.

[03:30:36] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: England? Bruce, are you there?

[03:30:41] Bruce England: I am. Are you all there too? Nobody asked you. You know, I think it's only fair that I ask you. Um, okay, wow. So much to talk about and so little time, and it's late. Um, I, like others who have spoken, I do think, I think staff for all the work and the consultants and everybody, um, I really think that we're on the right track here. But, do you hear me okay, because somebody just commented that I'm cutting out. Do you hear me? No, I can hear you. We can hear you completely fine. Okay, thanks. Going back to what April was saying about the history of vehicle accommodation, and I'm sure you all know this, but a lot of this comes from the motor vehicle industry, and it goes back to the 20s and 30s. If you look at film clips of streetscapes prior to that time. Everybody's just going where they need to go. The cars are going 5 or 10 miles an hour, cable cars, horse carts and stuff, and everybody else is just walking and biking wherever they need to go. And it all just came to a crashing halt very quickly. And here we are trying to bring back accommodation for people walking and biking. Um, And it's taking us a really long time to do it. Maybe that's just the way the cookie crumbles, but um, it is, as April said, not hard to miss that most of the infrastructure accommodation is for motor vehicles and not for people walking and biking around. So we, you know, you compare the number of parking spaces. in a location with bike racks, if there are even bike racks existing, and if they're near the door so that people can keep an eye on their bikes and have something solid to lock to and all of that, or try driving, like I'm in Wisman Station, try driving from, um, here to what used to be Nob Hill Market. You can get there within 5 minutes. You just zip along 237 in Grant Road and you're there. You bike that same thing. You're going all the way over to Calderon and on Phyllis and through the back entry to get to the grocery store and it takes you a whole lot longer. At least there's a way to get there, but, um, it's really different experience. I, like many people who've spoken, I also drive. I don't I try to drive as little as possible, but I do drive. And I just find the experience of driving is a lot easier. It's just simply a lot easier to get around than if you're walking and biking. It's never going to be as easy to walk and bike, but we could make it easier here in Mountain View. My last point, and I just, this is kind of historical because I bring it up all the time, but we really need amenities and we need them throughout the city and not just in parks. We need the benches, we need the water fountains, hydration stations, and above all, restrooms that are maintained and that are open as many hours a day as possible and not shut down at sunset. That's ridiculous. Um, I could say plenty more, but I just wanted to cover those points. Thank you. Thank you. Do

[03:33:36] Chair Alison Hicks: we have more speakers? That

[03:33:40] Unknown Speaker: is all, no more.

[03:33:41] Chair Alison Hicks: Okay. Okay, so now it's time for committee questions.

[03:33:47] Chair Alison Hicks: Who would like to go first?

[03:33:51] Unknown Speaker: And 2nd questions about.

[03:33:54] Committee Member John McAlister: I don't have any questions.

[03:33:58] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: I have a few. No, go ahead once I figure out how I want to, yes. No, um, my questions are about, kind of how, um, John started with timing last time. I 1st uh, Let me ask this. It appears to me that the cut sheets or the top 20 priority projects are kind of the heart of the plan, because we have all this policy, but Those are the things that will actually happen. Is that true or am I reading it wrong? So

[03:34:32] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: the plan recommends infrastructure projects, which are the top 20. It also includes programs of quality. So that's more than... And I would say the heart of the plan is those 2 things combined. So

[03:34:47] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: you're saying the policies would roll out. I'm trying to figure out how they roll out outside of those top 20 projects. They roll out like just wherever they apply in precise plans in other places. Luckily, they get a lot.

[03:35:02] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: I mean, giving... And part of this, maybe, you know, this might be one of the reasons why there was a recommendation to organize the table. Um, Looking at the plant. We have, for example, the top one, the 1st one. I don't want to say top. They're not in a priority plan. No right turn on red policy. Implement a pilot, apparently the right turns on red, selected locations. Um, So, That would stick out on it. Come out as. There was a pilot we would. One time, evaluated. And so it would be implemented that way. Um, so some of these are actually, They could be CIPs in among themselves, and then there's other things like staff continuing education. Yeah,

[03:35:51] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: okay, you're calling out, you are calling out the ones that are not, but the ones that are CIPs. When do what triggers them happening? Is it when they fall into these top 20 projects?

[03:36:03] Unknown Speaker: No, I think we would. I think the evaluation, of course, I should say evaluation. decision to decide when to implement these would be very similar to the decision on when we can implement the, um, the capital projects. If it was something that needed a CIP, it would be based on the capacity, the funding, the availability of being added to a CIP. If it's something that's more internal, we would need to evaluate other ways. That would probably be. But I will also let either Alison or Jennifer. Yeah, I mean, something broad, like I know right on red is, city wide, right? We're not identifying that it would happen with a call 20. And so we would look strategically at any project that was moving forward, whether it was a top 20 or whether it was, you know, one that we had keto and design, to see if it was a viable candidate for, you know, a location to to implement a pilot of, I guess, back to. So we would, we would look for, we would look for opportunities to include those, um, Because we have guidance and policy standards. And

[03:37:16] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: then the, as for the cut sheets themselves, Um, they mostly consist of 3 parts, now resurface what happens during resurfacing and what happens during reconstruction. How likely are we to reconstruct within the next? I'll ask the same question in 2 ways. How likely are we to reconstruct within the next, say, 10 or 20 years, I, and To me, when I look at them, the green infrastructure only comes in with reconstruction. And I'm, so I'm thinking, We don't get there with that. lifetime. With that, any, we don't get any green infrastructure in my lifetime is what I'm thinking. Um, Just, uh, You know, it just seems like we're putting off the green structure for it. So am I reading that long? It's, You know, it looks like everything, mostly everything just puts a bunch of ballards around me. In the, when we resurface, and that's what the whole, um, city kind of becomes. When do you expect to do reconstruction? So,

[03:38:41] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: I think for some of the priority projects, we actually are already implanting portions of it, except for rents. Well, ranks, ranks, but I believe that with the Miramonte, what we're constructing right now, we'll have some elements of structure incorporated into it. Um, we just submitted a, Grant, we don't know yet if it's festival or Elton real, and Calderon, which would include that, the Calderon Phyllis, which would include a small segment of the Phyllis project. And that, the grant that we developed, Uh, we wrote it up to include green infrastructure in there. So as the projects moved forward, we're looking for opportunities to do that. And so, Some of the projects are further along than others. Um, so I would say you would see some great

[03:39:36] Public Works Director Ng: friction within your lifetime. Really nice thing about having pet sheets identified in an approved active transportation plan is that it says that we've contemplated this as a city. This is what we want as a city and it provides us an ability to then go after grants because we can say, hey, this is what we want. We wanted it for a long time. Mr. granting agency, you know, give us your back.

[03:40:02] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: So is there, I'm happy to hear that there are some that will, that, that there are places here and there that may be happening within my lifetime. Um, but is, I still find the implementation of reinfrastructure kind of flow with this program the way it is. Um, I, and I, so I'm gonna ask. I'm going to ask whether there's a way to, whether you see a way to speed it up. And the thing I have in mind, I think the person who said it best was when Tracy Chu spoke at in the previous iteration, the previous item. She said, um, that Reinstorf seemed like a forgotten corridor, and she wanted more deliberate design, and it would encourage her to bike and walk more. I feel like that about a lot of places that more deliberate design and more green infrastructure makes it feel like a real place, a community gathering space. I just feel like that's, really, um, delayed in the way this is laid out. So I'm wondering if you have a way of speeding that up.

[03:41:11] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: start? You can start because I think there's a policy. Okay, go ahead.

[03:41:17] Public Works Director Ng: Yeah, and so the, The, um, resurfacing project anticipates that the city would primarily use resurfacing, but it's PVA buddies, right? And those have a limitation as to what they can be utilized for. We get away with things like creating class 2 bike lanes into class 4 bike lanes because it's. You know, we call it part of the signing and striking along a corridor. Uh, where the actual opportunity comes in is if we were to add additional resources to a paving project. Say for example, we had enough space for an effort bike lane. Um, and we could get it. Um, a green buff, right? where you could get it, you know, live plantings in there. Um, the paving money wouldn't apply to that. It's not something that is, um, allowable for the funding sources that we currently get. And so then it would mean additional, Um, monies from another source, be added to. So

[03:42:16] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: it is a resource limitation. I see it. So you're saying due to resource limitations, there is no way to get in green infrastructure. So that's

[03:42:28] Public Works Director Ng: how we would add to, um, For example, resurfacing projects to get additional greenery. Doesn't mean we can get trees everywhere because there are, you know, subsurface utilities that run all along up and down the streets, but, you know, we should be able to get bushes. We should be able to get, you know, nice, nice things that are living things out into the street. Um. Oh, we have a staff member on the line. Robert Gonzalez. I dont know if you wanted to chime in on this last question. Good

[03:43:09] Principal Civil Engineer Gonzales: evening. can you hear me Yes, I am. Okay, yes, I just wanted to add to uh, director Ing's comment on resource limitations. So, we are kind of hamstrunk by some of the regional, Funding sources that we get for pavement. They are exclusively tied to pavement. So, for example, the SP one funding, um, is mandated that we use that for pavement, 1st until we reach a certain PCI. So, um, other parts of the CIP are specifically called out for pavement maintenance, which is the slurry program. So we're left with about one to $2000000 of dedicated funding that we could use for, um, reconstruction. Um, so, the portions we use for reconstruction would also be the ones that would, um, would be committed towards green infrastructure. So it really is a limitation on the on the resources. If you look uh, system wide in the Bay Area. You'll see that, uh, other jurisdictions that have higher PCI or have committed to some of their corridors with green infrastructure. those are all very much local funded. So those are measures that were put in in 2017 or 2020 or 2024. Um, and were voted in by, by, uh, residents. That's all locally funded. Very few cities can actually reach, um, you know, some sort of green infrastructure goal with the regional funding alone. So I just wanted to add that. Thank you. So

[03:44:40] Chair Alison Hicks: what I'm hearing is the answer is we have to find local funding for those things to supplement. And which is, you know, not insurmountable, but it's a matter of priorities. Um. And. Uh, oh, how do we see the standard detail updates? as they roll out. Yeah,

[03:45:06] Public Works Director Ng: so we're just starting that process in the engineering group. We plan to follow the same timeline as um CDD's objective design standards. I think what we're going to do is spend this fall and into the early winter, you know, doing the technical details behind the scenes, and then, um, early in 27, Robert, correct me if I'm wrong, I believe we start going to, um, the various committees, um, commissions. Um, And Why

[03:45:47] Chair Alison Hicks: on, I'm still wondering on many of the cut sheet examples. Why we would widen sidewalks as opposed, what cross benefit is, I guess, as opposed to closing sidewalk gap, and circumventing obstructions, those make sense. But I think there's, uh, huge cost to widening sidewalks. Many of these are in front of single family home. And it just seems like. Like, green infrastructure would encourage walking more than widely sidewalks, and we're putting probably much more money into widening sidewalks than into putting in the green infrastructure. So why would we be making those choices? Is it? Forest on us by. Bunders or? Can we switch that sort of cost benefit, you know, can we go? Can we just go around like go around the phone calls? Yes. Uh, and uh, fill in the gaps when they're no sidewalks. But all these places where it says we're going to widen them. We took those out, the money that would be available for greening would be astronomic. Because those are very high costs for doing something I don't think. And that is not going to encourage walking in the way that having shape. So

[03:47:14] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: what we've proposed in the plan. On the cut sheets. It's an initial take. And it all needs to be validated as we move forward. And. And we agree that it's challenging in some cases to do the full sidewalk winding. other applications and it's not that it's challenging. It's

[03:47:38] Chair Alison Hicks: not necessary. In front of it, many of these are in my neighborhood. They, they're single family neighborhoods. I mean, yes, if we, uh, if due to SP 79, there's a 7 foot apartment put in, then we rethink things. But, To spend all this tax money or whatever, you know, funding money on widening sidewalks and single family neighborhoods that don't have trees, it makes, it's just, A wrongs spending money. And a lot of them. And it's something that, you know, I can't support it, and I don't know whether people have visited some of these places. My book on. I

[03:48:25] Public Works Director Ng: was just going to say, the intent is to say that we be a need on specific foreigners and where envision. Um, people could, if there was. So you're right. You develop his new development is likely the most. Um, plausible way that we would get wider sidewalks in the future rather than spending money to, to, to grab an extra foot. Of sidewalk on an already built out area that single family homes. But an extra foot of sidewalk. Gets you, um, better walking experience. You can get 2 people walking side by side or a mom with stroller and another person walking side by side that is much more tight and not as comfortable in a 5 foot with them. Never mind, even a 4th foot. So it's the vision. Um, I wouldn't say that it would be our 1st choice for where to spend our CIP monies is to add another sidewalk.

[03:49:29] Chair Alison Hicks: I'll move on from this one, but there, I would like to walk you through these neighborhoods because we've, I've walked through, I walked through. Okay. Um, and. Okay, I think I've, I've asked, answered my questions. Um, council member commit. Thanks.

[03:49:53] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Um, I just had a suggestion, which is maybe for those, if there's, you know, some follow-up things, maybe that could be, you know, incorporated as part of the motion chair, you know, if we're able to, um, recommend that the plan go forward to the full council. We could also give staff feedback of some things that we'd like to see. Um, As you were mentioning, and so maybe they could, they could be incorporating that and then it can, you know, continue to live on the, whatever feedback that we have. But, um, Just a question slash idea. Okay. And

[03:50:33] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: if I get additional information. I wanted to flip through so I didn't quote the wrong information, but we did look at, um, minimum widths, recommended widths for certain infrastructure, and for sidewalks, it was minimum witness spy, so if there were locations where it was four. That would be where any increase. Yeah,

[03:50:54] Chair Alison Hicks: that's why I wondered why you had been to many of these places because they are 5 feet. And they have planning strips and to tear those out and widen it. It would just be a very poor choice of how to spend money. Okay, other people have questions. Also, remember the master?

[03:51:17] Committee Member John McAlister: Oh, questions, comments. Um, I really don't have any questions. Well, I have a ton of questions. You know where I'm going. So I'm not gonna ask you tonight. Hopefully, we can, we can come together on some stuff. The concerns I've had always been. We've had that strong body of advocacies. I just like to see some. from staff sometimes to say, okay. Yeah, you're maybe doing it, but I just, you know, come along, and this has been going on for a long time before I, but they, they do are very, uh, effective on what they're doing. So, and that's why I continue to ask questions about, the data, show me the data part, the question of, Carol, and by the way, thank you for incorporating all those things. So I asked Carol, who says, what's community input? How many people was it? Was it a few? I mean, the reason I bring this up, because I live there, I just, you know, And then, how does it make it more accessible to a place that's been accessible? Or 50 years. That how does it, and you hear these words, but I go, Okay, how did you come to them and did this really mean anything? I mean, people get down there back and forth, and I have never, and I go to, uh, all the time and talking to the principal. I've never really hurt anybody, oh, well, we need to sidewalks because we can't accessible. I know you, you, you resolved and said that, but just the thought process of how some of this stuff is brought up is what I like to see. The gentleman tonight. Is somebody that is on the other side and someone that I try to represent is, okay, you have this, these people that are very passionate about what they want. But there are other voices to be heard and they're not being heard. Or they're not. They're not saying, I'm not saying that they haven't had the opportunity anymore. But they don't come out. Because it's not something until it affects my street, that they come out and start saying. Uh, I mean, I was talking about next door, you see people, just going across about California Street. I think California is an interesting thing and I'll reserve comment on it because you're gonna go through it and hopefully. Will I come to CTC or you just, okay. Okay, just to see you tweak. Uh, one of my questions was when we were talking about ring store, corner of California ring store. You got a big bowl out there. If you got a truck moving people. I, you know, is that going to be reviewing? Um. And that's where, I would hope that we get some ground. You guys, I appreciate you listen to us and you've accommodated what you could do for us. But I still question her. No, I said this was common question. Is that okay? Since that was the last one. Um. It's like the gentleman said, this document by itself is an excellent document. If we were just looking at this and we put the blinders on, it goes all the way, there's a lot of good data, there's maps, there's everything. But it, to me, it's not standalone. It has to incorporate cars, just like that gentleman said. It has to incorporate. We got those other plants. And I just feel that it's strongly so wrongly and biased that people are going to say, well, we don't need cars. A T, plea, plea, uh, E T, P is says what we can do. And it doesn't say, this gives them freedence or some empowerment to say, well, this is what, so we don't need to worry about this. And that's what the thing that concerns me is, I would like to see somehow it's, when you say, well, we're going to coordinate with other things. It has to incorporate transportation cars. Because that's not going away. And affects everything. So, uh, I will get with, whoever would answer some questions that they send the title to. Comments, yeah, a good report, but it's standard. It's, it's making progress. I really appreciate you listening and trying and doing what you did to get the projects there. What is this bike? Bull apart. There's

[03:55:52] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: not a Caltrans designation for a bike boulevard. It's essentially a shared, a bike, a street where bicyclists share the lane with motor vehicles, but it is slow speed. And it is low. And sometimes often to make a bike boulevard, you incorporate things, like, little mini, traffic circles,

[03:56:14] April Webster: or, uh, you do chicanes,

[03:56:17] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: where you narrow the roadway for a little bit. The idea is that the traffic palm street where the motorists drive slow enough, the bicyclists can share the road with. You've driven. It

[03:56:28] Committee Member John McAlister: is narrow, you can only go snow. That

[03:56:31] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: is my, how I drive to work when I drive to work and I drive. It's okay. It's very narrow. Um, may I? May I respond just briefly? Oh, I respond. So during the public engagement, We did hear from a lot of individuals, Sylvan and other locations. Specifically, concerns about the proposals and the cut sheets. And so we went in when we heard those specific concerns and we double checked what was what was in there and in some cases, for example, at Sylvan. Um, we looked at the, at the roadway and the roadway went. And few of the concerns we heard were, we don't need wider sidewalk and we need our parking. proposal. Instill then. What you see on the cut sheet is the narrowest section and we looked and you actually can do a protected bike way on silver and include parking on one side of the road on most of for most of it. So we added, we added more context to the narrative. Um, To address some of the questions or concerns that people brought up for different, for different projects. Um, and I was going to comment on something else, and I don't know what it was. Why are you taking part? So, Sylvan is a really important. I mean, it scored. We use this, right. We use the scoring criteria to identify the locations. And That scoring criteria was based on. Mostly based actually on quantity metrics. And community engagement was one, it was 9 out of, out of a 100 possible points, a small percentage. And The other thing I was going to mention is one of the specific recommendations. We did look at the ADT for the vehicle volumes. When we were determining what. Sylvan,

[03:58:42] Committee Member John McAlister: they've always complained about speed. So

[03:58:45] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: the proposal could reduce the speech. You

[03:58:47] Committee Member John McAlister: were going to say you tried to put aside, stop signing, but that's, we could talk about LA, but they didn't have enough data to justify, stop signing. So

[03:58:57] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: we did, we really did try to listen and what's in here is, is solid and I, I see, I feel very comfortable with what's in the proposals with the, with the time that, We've read this all over the country, that they all need to. Because we don't have all the data right now. This is a 1st sketch of what today. No,

[03:59:22] Committee Member John McAlister: I appreciate that. I mean, I'm still, I'm looking at the processing. Repeat. But yes, I appreciate you doing it. And by defining your process, yeah. Mm-hmm. Well, let you say that. So that's all I have. So,

[03:59:40] Chair Alison Hicks: remember, my husband has, uh, comments. Well,

[03:59:44] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: I was just gonna, I think we need to take a motion, so I'm happy to move that, um, we, um, refer the ATP to council. I think that's the action that's necessary. Is that right? Staff? Right. Okay, great. Um, so I'll make that motion and then I'll make a couple comments if that's okay. Sure. Okay, so, um, just really want to think staff. Um, this has been such a long arduous process, even, um, and I really appreciate the revisions, um, even between our, um, council meeting, or, or sorry, our CTC meeting in June to now, and even the updates that you were able to, to share. I think some of the public comment also was thanking you for that and I can just see how much people are engaged and I'm really grateful for that. Um, one of the things I just keep thinking as I'm hearing chair hicks and committee member McAllister. Um, kind of comment slash questions. And I think this came up in when I commented back in June is, you know, some sort of dashboard or interactive something so that residents can see the work in progress. So, you know, it sounds like it's going to be iterative and that these, as, um, it sounds like the cut sheets are the kind of 1st pass, but, Because it's on a catchy, it still can get feedback, it sounds like, perhaps, or if residents want to, you know, keep engaged and, you know, speak with staff. I just feel like there's really an avenue there that could be helpful. Um, for, for individuals to feel like the needs in their community are being met as we're trying to, you know, adopt this program and plan. I'm not sure if that's possible, but that's my, that would be my comment there. I think that, um, The reason why I'm wanting to bring this forward to council is, I think it's a step in a direction that the city has trying to take, um, for many years, and we, um, think this is a good, uh, step. I do feel we want to make sure that there's, you know, um, Stakeholder engagement beyond just the adoption of the ATP. And so just seeing just in terms of the outreach, you know, the in-person, tabling at events, the multi, um, lingual engagement. Uh, we can keep this uh, uh, show that this is top of mind for us as we're implementing, um, throughout the city and and let people know and also like provide updates. So whether that's in like the view that goes out or, um, you know, through social media or other things, I think residents would love to be updated versus, you know, not thinking about the ATP till they see a project next to their home. Or or where they live or where their kids go to school or where, you know, they have some sort of activity. So, I think those are kind of just like my general overall comments. Thanks. May I add on? Sure.

[04:02:49] Public Works Director Ng: So with respect to dashboards, um, I think you've heard me talk about it before, but one of the project management tools that I'm looking at is started up. Uh, for my team is the use of something called the builder, helps us track, um, capital projects from beginning to end. Um, we've been asked for dashboards, they were called to the different types of projects, you know, transportation projects are just one of. My goal was, um, one to get E-builder, um, stood up over the next fiscal year, and from that, I will have readily accessible information to be able to create all sorts of questions. So I'm, it's, it's in the works, um, but sort of across a bunch of different, uh, topics. But all capital projects, topics.

[04:03:48] Chair Alison Hicks: No, I heard motion. In terms of the motion. Um, in order to support it, I'm going to need something. Um, so there are particular cut sheets that I look at them, and I just know they're not viable, like really not viable. So, I would like something. I can't vote for them when I could show your particular ones, but it's too late at night to do that. So, if they're labeled as, you know, all of them as really needing review. And then my 2nd thing is, that might be something that I could, and then I would like to show you actually shows some of them. Um, And then the 2nd thing is, um, Perhaps there's a lot in this. And I really liked a lot of the greening, but I don't see when it's going to happen or how it's going to happen. And I feel like in order to support it. I need, um, Uh. That's the thing that I think really, um, accelerates, uh, pedestrianism, and I don't, I see that not being addressed, really. So is there some language that you think of? About, and you mentioned, and and frankly, looking for it, but the cut sheets are so obvious in terms of, Kind of, you know, these are the 20th. The, the projects I, that you mentioned are the policy. I don't see the prioritization or implementation for it. It's hard for me to figure that out For the, the policies and programs.

[04:05:28] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: Yeah. We don't have a prioritization in the plan for that, the recommendation. The request was not to go through a prioritization process. Um, but instead provide information that would allow staff and in the community and city council to better differentiate between the different opponents. Or the different recommendations. So some are recommendations that is just continuing what we already do. Some are, uh, expanding some, uh, spanning pre-existing programs, some are brand new. Some require different levels of staff effort.

[04:06:16] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: Is there a way to differentiate that? Is it already differentiated on that sheet? That

[04:06:21] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: was one of the, that was one of the recommendations that we, in, to do as part of the edits to the plan. Yeah.

[04:06:31] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: And so when this comes forward to council, sorry, sorry to ask this question, chair Hicks, but when this comes forward to council, will all those changes that you all recommended be implemented in time for that September 22nd meeting? Or will it be kind of the same presentation as tonight, will go to council? Our

[04:06:54] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: intention is to take emotion that you have, um, that you, you pass emotion with the recommendations, our intention is to very quickly, turn around the plan and put those in, have, it in the plan that goes to state council. Great. So, If there, and what we have listed in the PowerPoint, we believe that we are able to do that quick turnaround. Um, we're talking a matter of days in order to meet the deadlines. So if it's a, if it's a larger, substantive, um, recommendation, then we'll have to discuss. The profits to go forward schedule. So

[04:07:45] Chair Alison Hicks: I'm basically seeing one, in terms of the policies and programs. I'm sorry, I'm late to this because I was focusing around. I see on page 50, table 7, uh, list of recommended policies and programs, actually starts like previous. It starts on our narrow language. Um, 48. Um, but on page 50. Um, there's the greening and tree canopy improvements. That's the one. That, so that's the big thing that I think one of the big things that I think it proves, uh, walking. And it's one item among all the, I mean, I think in the fact shapes, it's going to happen on most streets very, very late. And Out of all these different programs, there's just this one program. Can I ask that that be worked on and highlighted in some way? Because I think that's one of the things that I'm really feeling a need for. So

[04:08:49] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: right above that, on page 50 right above the, um, the longer narrative, there's the specific, Incorporate greenery and street trees into larger infrastructural improvements along roadways, these kind of, it talks about the benefit. If there's additional language, you'd like this to add to that description. Or even the other screening entry canopies or or even a specific recommendation. Um.

[04:09:22] Chair Alison Hicks: I, I mean, we could, we could potentially look for, um, you know, one of the, one of the limitations we talked about was funding, so we, for, for, Funding streams or opportunities. I would have to make sure dinner was okay with this recommendation. to fund, of improvements. Um, Yeah,

[04:09:49] Chair Alison Hicks: I would say, and, you know, find a way to enhance it and say, uh, that, uh, looking for funding streams. And, um, and also, prioritizing it as one of the primary ways of enhancing, um, industrial ethnic. We

[04:10:09] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: can highlight. Yeah, we can put in the specific phrasing enhanced pedestrianism or enhance. Yeah, yeah. So

[04:10:21] Chair Alison Hicks: maybe if you can beef up that one and talk about funding streams. That would, that would help. I

[04:10:30] Public Works Director Ng: think we can also note that this is, um, formality with the biodiversity plan, um, and therefore is. I think we could just call additional attention to it in that way. And just note that it's. Yeah, I would like to feature it in both additional

[04:10:52] Chair Alison Hicks: attention, prioritization, you know, anything you can do to move it up in time, so it doesn't all happen 30 years from now. Um. And

[04:11:03] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: we can even add in there something about coordinate internally. Right. identify opportunities. Right,

[04:11:11] Chair Alison Hicks: because the, the other part of the, the, the plan has a lot of good things around. There's a lot of great, you know, diagrams and so forth, but I just have a feeling that it will, it's not a priority and it won't actually happen. I will only get that plan. Um, okay, so my thing is labeled the cut sheets as clearly as, um, uh, you know, not, not the final product. We can make reference

[04:11:38] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: back to validation. Yes. I think we do have a lot of that, but maybe we, maybe we just draft. Yeah. put draft on all of them. I don't know. We have so much in the touch sheets. We have a lot of locations and we say it in multiple ways. At the very bottom, it said, these concepts are drafted, not final, final design, the proposed improvements will require further community info- physically analogy. say that in bigger letters. Um, the disclaimer larger. Yeah,

[04:12:12] Chair Alison Hicks: and the last thing I need to support it is the, um, the, uh, the bike boulevards and shared streets to kind of, there's a way of enhancing that. Um, because I think that's kind of a quick build thing. And this mainly looks at major streets, major thoroughfares, and not the neighborhood. Um. One

[04:12:42] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: of our recommendations is to add sentence spell quick. for low cost safety improvement. Mm-hmm. Possibly we can. Concept of like boulevards in there, but we'll, we'll look for a way to do that. Yeah. and have flexibility to figure out what the best

[04:13:04] Chair Alison Hicks: one. So those are the 3 things I need. um, House member can may if we can add those, then I'll go. Okay. Okay, uh, council member McAllister, do you have additional comments or? Okay, then, uh...

[04:13:25] Committee Member John McAlister: Time every now and then. So maybe a discussion to do like, I'm still pretty admin about integrating it. Trafficker, just the concepts of the other product. It's necessarily have safe traffic, right? Oh, it's going to integrate. It's not a standable. Well,

[04:13:46] Chair Alison Hicks: certainly, I agree, the things you're saying about bus stops and, um, you know, like delivery. The

[04:13:54] Committee Member John McAlister: data that they, you know, get 5 people. I mean, it might be petty. Like, oh, we got 5 people. I just want to get there so it's up. You want some metrics to see? Well, we're doing metrics, but the neutrality. Staff saying, okay, yeah, we hear all you guys, but. So, that's a discussion you're back in with the director and say, yes. We are, we do it, our professionals. We hear that, but I always keep hearing. And everything they say is, it's stuff. Not everything. Council

[04:14:27] Unknown Speaker: member connect. Yeah,

[04:14:29] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: well, I'm, I'm hopeful, um, Councilman McAllister, that, you know, given some of the direction and the feedback that we gave tonight, is to find a way to make sure that our residents still feel like their voices are heard, you know, everyone has different uses and, you know, different concerns, and so it sounds like we'll be able to keep providing feedback and, you know, get more information, and I think was really encouraging between June and seeing it now is just how much staff reached out to those different entities we asked them to reach out to. And I think that'll kind of open. Um, you know, um, communication between the city, the different, you know, entity, you know, agencies, public agencies at least, you know, Caltrain, VTA, um, Cal, even, you know, Caltrans, how they're going to use their right of ways, the county, et cetera. So I think that this is all steps in the right direction, and I wouldn't want like, you know, it not being totally perfect to make it so that you won't vote for it tonight. So I'm trying to appeal to you, that I think there's a path forward for the concerns that you have. So. Yeah. Thanks. Okay,

[04:15:41] Chair Alison Hicks: should we take it to vote? Sure, go ahead. Okay, all those in favor, raise their hands. Okay, 2 people voting. It

[04:15:50] Committee Member Ellen Kamei: looks raised. I'm gonna, it looks raised over here.

[04:15:53] Dr. Tracy Farita: Did you raise your hand? I hear you did. And Did

[04:16:03] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: you get an official notion? I mean, I know what the question is. Ah, it's the staff, all the staff recommendations. Plus the 3 additional items that you requested. Yes, but I haven't written down. Do you want me? I wrote them down. let me read you read when I wrote. On page 50, the greening and tree canopy improvements by including the reference to funding, identifying funding streams. Uh, reference enhanced pedestrianism. I wrote down coordinate internally, but, um, That came. Yeah,

[04:16:42] Chair Alison Hicks: and prioritize in terms of timing. Oh, and prioritize. Okay. And

[04:16:51] Transportation Manager Ledbetter: then on the cut sheets make the disclaimer that we have there, more obvious and larger, holder. Yes, and then in the plan, in some location, enhance the discussion of bicycle boulevards and shared streets. And, uh, how they feed or what they are. Yeah, and

[04:17:10] Chair Alison Hicks: as as a possible part of the, uh, neighborhood traffic calming program as well. And kind of a quick build solution. Okay. So, That is what, that is what we heard. We also have recorded. Okay. We can go back. Okay, so is it recorded sufficiently? Do you want us to vote again? Or Now that you've read it? No. I think everyone understood,

[04:17:46] Public Works Director Ng: right? I don't think we need to revote. Okay.

6.1 Committee Comments

[04:17:53] Chair Alison Hicks: Okay, so now we will close item 5.2 and move to item 6. Um, 6 one, which is committee comments. Do any of the committee members have comments or reports that are there? Everyone's tired. I don't see any comments. Oh,

[04:18:17] Committee Member John McAlister: I was at films. I know. Would

7. ADJOURNMENT

[04:18:21] Chair Alison Hicks: any member of the public joining us virtually or in person like to provide comment on this item? If so, please click the raised hand button in Zoom, or approach the lecture, one committee. Oh, never enough. Okay. No speakers. I see no speakers. Um. So, we are now on item number 7. Uh, which is a journal. Thank you so much for joining us, our next council transportation committee meeting will be on November ninth of 2026 and the meeting is adjourned at 1020 p.m. Thank

[04:19:01] Transportation Planner Ahmed: you. Bye. Thank

[04:19:03] Chair Alison Hicks: you. Thank

[04:19:05] Transportation Planner Ahmed: you.

• ← Previous