June 16, 2026 Council Transportation Committee

Good evening everyone. Welcome to the council transportation committee meeting June 16th 6. Meeting will start at 606. This is a hybrid meeting allowing public comment in person and virtually. Instructions for addressing the committee virtually may be found on your station. Roll call. The assistant public works director will take attendance by roll call. Council member Pay

here.

Acting chair Mallister

here. We have a quorum.

Okay. Thank you sir for that. So uh oral communication. This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the committee on any matters not on agenda. Speakers are allowed to speak on any topic for 30 minutes during the section. State law prohibits committee from acting on non-aggenda items. Would any member of the audience like to provide comment on a non-aggenda item?

Hang on. We'll get there. Would any member of the public like to If so, please raise your hand or and we'll take and anybody virtually will zoom in. Please raise your hand. The staff will wait the timer on the screen and we will take Yes, sir.

Yeah. Members of the committee, my name is Gary Burr, um member of the VAC from about 2005 to9. Um I'll specifically address the middlefield proposal later, but in general, I'm seeing what I'm going to call tragedies waiting to happen because of a vagueness in the definition of segregated or separated bike lanes. my call to action. I haven't spoken or got involved because I'm pretty pleased in general with the state of bicycle pedestrian advocacy in town, but if any of you with maybe 60s something year old eyes um come in El Camino before or after, you know, sunset, sunrise, you will be blinded by sunrise off of these paddles. This highlights the uh lethal nature using these paddles and in driving down through uh

yes call them ballard or paddles the density the shortness between them is getting closer and closer. The basic tragedy waiting to happen many places I'm noting that these paddles have already been hit by cars. Um the curbing the strip up the asphalt it's a solid dedicated strip. I was part of the safe uh Mountain View group that uh took on upper Castro section up to the school with the reconfiguration. That is my idea of an ideal separated segregated bike lane because we just have rubber strips. There's full visibility in and out and there's rubber. bicycle hits that they're reflected in. In in the gap, they're safe. Car comes over, same thing. Their tires. So, this looseness in what's being called segregated and separated bike lanes itself, I'd like the council transportation committee to address and define before any other action moves forward that implements what's being called generically a separated or segregated bike. That's my request to the committee.

Thank you. I remembering Councilman Mallister from my first time on and these issues to have segregated and separated bike lanes back then we were told were dreams but look at what the dream has turned into great in concept but now let's put them in practice so that you know I don't feel safe bicycling on El Camino or where these ballards are anymore I live right near the middlefield stretch so that's my call to action thank you and appreciate your consideration Anybody else in the audience would like to speak?

Do we have any virtual people like to speak?

Um, yes, April Webster.

Okay. Hey, April, you know, this is a non-aggenda item.

Yeah. Um, hi, April Webster. I am a member of the California uh walk and bike technical advisory committee. um vice chair of the CALRD D4 bicycle advisory committee, co-chair of the MTC active transportation working group and a member of the VTA um BPAC. I am speaking of my own accord tonight, but I just wanted to share my affiliations. Um I have been a strong supporter of ECR for several years. It's actually what got me involved in advocacy and um and as part of my role on Calrans, I have been pushing hard for those bike lanes that we see. Um those bike lanes and the type of separation quick curb are actually very there are that kind of separation stronger separation and even stronger than that is what you need to see to have um a real modality shift. Um it's the type of protection that people who tend to be interested in biking but more risk averse and cautious um you know some of us don't have a death wish and so that more substantial protection is what a lot of people need to make that shift and there's research that's been done by Jennifer Dill out of Portland Trek um uh group that has shown that about 60% of people fall into that bucket. A lot of those are, you know, are people who are covered by all ages and abilities. Knack under NACTO's um guidance. And, you know, you take that away and you have more insubstantial type either paint or vertical paint which are the um the standard um flex posts and it becomes a lot less safer. You know, think about a 4,000B car that's barreling at you. It's basically like a tank in some ways and cars are getting a lot bigger now. Um when you have that coming at you um and the way that people are now distracted um it doesn't feel safe and it isn't safe um and a lot of cities are doing a better job in CALR included in terms of um building better infrastructure. So, um I would like to give my full support um and on El Camino Royale and I hope to see that extended along the entire extent of it and work has been done is being done at the Calrans level to make that happen. Um and yeah, I just want to say thanks. I'm glad that Mountain got involved really early. Um we were we actually made that happen. our staff and um uh both Don and Ria were um very heavily involved in making sure that happened and and worked with CALR in advance to make sure we got that what we needed in place to make um Alamina Rail a protected have protected bike lanes. Thank you so much.

Thank you, April. Anybody else? Any more uh virtual speaker?

Bruce England.

Bruce.

Hi all. Um happy to attend any of these meetings where we're talking about the active transportation plan. This is been a long time coming and um we're still keeping track of it and um hoping for the best when it becomes uh part of the city regulations and rules and guidelines. Uh just a few things echoing pretty much what April said, but also um just a few things that she might not have said or that weren't in the letter, which I support by the way. Um I think that timing for when we bring our comments in, this isn't just for the ATP, but for a lot of the plans, we're often told early on that it's too early. Don't tell us your comments yet. And then later on, we make our comments and we're told it's too late. and being clear with the public about when you want to hear our comments. We'll make them every time. Believe me, if we're not told one way or the other, then we're just going to make our comments at every meeting. And that might not always be useful. Uh second, I have four things to say. Second is, and I don't know if it's appropriate for the ATP, but I'm just going to bring it up, that we've got at least two paths, uh, bike ped paths in Mountain View that lead to abrupt curbs where they just cut off and you have to hop your bike or stroller or wheelchair, whatever, over a straight up curb to get down to any other thoroughare like to a bike lane, let's say. um those haven't been corrected yet and I worry that um maybe we'll see more of those and it's better just to head them off. That should be part of the project. In any case, anytime there's a path uh that's constructed, whether it's private or public, uh we shouldn't be leading to abrupt curbs like that. That should just be part of the project. Um third of four, one of the qualities of our walkways and bikeways is making them inviting to people. So having them be safe and all of that. As April mentioned, this is important. Um, but we also want to get more people out of their cars and enjoying walking and biking around Mountain View. It's a great place to walk and bike if you feel uh that it's comfortable and safe and inviting. So, I like the word inviting for that reason. And last, I just want to emphasize the NATO uh guidelines and standards that that April mentioned. This is really important for us to move forward into the modern age of active transportation and transportation in general in Mountain View. And that's it for me. Thank you.

Thank you, Bruce.

Need more virtual speakers.

Yes, Cliff Chambers.

Thank you. Uh Cliff Chambers, resident of Mountain View. Um I'm also part of MVCSP in the letter. I just want to emphasize a couple of different points than what C April and Bruce talked about. First off, I think um the NACTO standards that Bruce said is really important. I just want to emphasize that. Secondly, I'm really happy about the network of protected bike lanes. But one of the things and the extensive output that we that was held and and provided comments on bike rides and public forums on surveys. There were a lot of opportunities for input and but for one of the excuse me

yes

are you gonna be addressing you're sort of touching on the line of the ATP so this is for content item so

oh I'm sorry I thought this was I I apologize I'll stop

that's okay keep those thoughts though

I no uh I I'll do it when we go to the ATP so I'm sorry I I thought they were talking about the ATP I came in late I I'll stop and and Wait.

Thank you.

Okay. Any other people that would speak on non-aggenda items?

No, that's all.

Okay. We will now go to consent calendar. We're on item four. 4.1 approved. Minutes

and Oh, 4.1 approved. Yes. Are there any corrections, additions to the minutes? Okay, see none. Any public like to make comment on our minutes? Okay. Uh then we also have a consent item for we'll take them all vote all at one time. That's okay. 1.2 Council Transportation Committee revised minutes schedule. Any comments? It's interesting because this committee in six months will be a new committee. So

as long

Yeah. Okay. Uh we approve that. Is there a

Okay. Take a vote on the consent calendar.

Uh I'll move consent items 4.1 and 4.2.

I'll second that. Okay. Do we need roll call because we're virtual? Thank you for that reminder member

here. Oh yes.

Is there Yes.

Okay. It passed. We will now go to new business. We will take up the 5.1 the major topic of tonight act transportation public draft public draft oh okay for review um item one is an act of transport public draft for review the staff presentation will be provided by transportation manager and Alison Boyer assistant public works Tracy McMullen project manager of theation plan and Nelson Ngard is available to answer questions after the presentation.

Okay, we have a presentation. It's done. There we go. Okay,

great. Good evening. Um, as acting chair Mallister mentioned, we have Nelson Nygard on the phone to help answer questions at the end of the presentation, but tonight we are here to discuss the Mountain View Active Transportation Plan, the draft plan, and staff is requesting CTC pro review and provide comments on the plan. So, quickly a little bit of background. The agenda is we'll do a quick project update. Um, walk through what the Mountain View Active Transportation Plan components are and then we will go into what we heard um through our outreach process and then move into resolutions and next steps. Um quickly on the project update. So this project has been split into three phases. Um we are currently here in phase three which is reviewing the draft and moving into plan adoption. Um as I think it was previously mentioned this project has been in the works since 2022. So we are happy to be moving forward to a plan adoption. Um this project has gone through multiple engagement rounds with various support uh types of support throughout. Um we had multiple working groups, outreach surveys and we are happy with where we've landed and all of the community what we've received through this last round. And with that I'm going to pass.

Great. Thank you. Good evening. Can you go to the next slide, please? And then the next slide. So, I'm going to walk through first the components of the plan, give you a overview of it, and then I will at the tail end, I will summarize the um themes that we received from the outreach and engagement we just conducted. So, the active transportation plan uh was developed using both data and community input. It proposes projects, policies, and programs to support promote walking in the city. And it also supports the city's sustainability and greening goals. It builds on multiple previous plans that were adopted by both the city as well as uh countywide, regional, and state agencies, including the prior bicycle and pedestrian plans that were adopted by the city. uh CALR complete streets action plan, the MTC regional active transportation plan and other local plans such as access MD and the vision zero action plan and the local roadway safety plan. Go to the next slide please. So the plan is divided into four sections, four chapters. The first chapter, the introduction, it introduces the plan. It describes the process that we used to develop it, summarizes the public and stakeholder engagement and outlines the vision and the guiding principles which were adopted by city council. Chapter 2 is essentially the existing conditions chapter. It describes travel patterns, bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, safety data and it also includes holistic maps of existing and proposed pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure. Chapter 3 presents the recommended policies and programs and identifies the high priority projects for moving forward uh in implementing the plan. And then finally, chapter 4 describes how the projects can be implemented. It covers phasing options. It discusses ways to incorporate green infrastructure into roadway improvement projects and it also summarizes funding opportunities. There are also several appendices associated with the plan including appendices that list all of the recommended projects not just the priority projects you want to make you can go to the next slide. Okay. So the vision and the guiding principles I mentioned um that was adopted by city council but it was also brought to this uh committee as as well as the bicycle pedestrian advisory committee for review and comment. Uh I won't read the vision to you but you can take a look at it in support of and and to implement the vision we have those five guiding principles listed there on the slide. Mobility and connectivity refers to streets that are easy to use and well connected for walking, biking, and rolling. Safety and comfort refers to trails, sidewalks, bikeways, intersections, and crosswalks that are safe, inviting, and easy to use. Access and equity refers to policies and programs that engage and protect vulnerable populations and increase mobility choices. Sustainability and biodiversity refers to green streets that improve access to nature and open spaces and promote sustainability and native habitats and storm water management. And finally, actionoriented and forward thinking refers to an implementable plan with clear standards that are updated and aligned with adopted policies. So we refer to these guiding principles in the vision throughout the development of the plan. You can go to the next slide. So a quick summary of the internal ex external engagement activities. Um internally we convened a technical advisory committee to review and comment on the key deliverables. We also formed an external active transportation public advisory committee the ATPAC which consisted of community- based organizations and public agencies such as the county public health department and BTA. They also reviewed and provided comments of key deliverables. Uh we presented key deliverables to the BPA and PTC as well council. And then in terms of engaging the general public, we used a variety of means, a variety of events including um multilingual focus groups, walking and biking tours, popups at community events. We had an online map and survey which uh received over 600 individual comments and we also hosted um public workshops for people to review plan deliverables comments and you can see some of the pictures some of the activities here and go to the next slide. Okay. So, I mentioned we received over 600 comments um through these engagement activities and really the the key topline findings are that Mountain View is already a very active community. Residents want access to key destinations. They want to be able to walk and bike to more places and have safer uh walking and biking conditions. Um, and the city system for walking and biking is already rather robust, but there are gaps that exist in the network. And so this plan used uh this input from the community as well as I mentioned the data to identify places to make improvements. So we can fill in gaps in the network for both advice lists. We can improve the quality of the walking and biking infrastructure and generally increase connectivity across the city and enhance safety and comfort and look for opportunity to incorporate greening into these projects. Go to the next slide. Thanks Laura. All right, I'm going to show the recommended improvements the holistic maps that I mentioned earlier in the presentation. Uh these are in chapter two of the plan. Uh this map here is the bicycle the holistic bicycle network. It includes both existing bikeways and proposed bikeways. And it was built off of prior planning work including precise plans and other uh citywide efforts that identified particular bikeway pipes for different roadways. We reviewed this and identified gaps that could potentially be closed and identified reviewed and recommended different types of bikeway facilities based on variables such as roadway with the safety and operational characteristics of the roadway land uses and who was expected to use the roadway for example students or seniors. The table here uh describes how many uh recommended new uh or upgraded bikeways there are by bike recite and you can go to the next slide. So for the holistic pedestrian network the plan includes two maps. Um the first map is the existing conditions. So what pedestrian infrastructure already exists? The second map, the one I'm showing here, are the proposed improvements to the pedestrian infrastructure. Just like the bikeway, we built off prior planning work. In this case, we focused a lot on the local roadway safety plan, the vision zero plan. Again, we looked at the recommendations in precise plans and the previous pedestrian plan. We identified where there were gaps in the sidewalk network and where there were opportunities to provide crossing improvements uh such as new crossings or reducing the overall length of you can see here the summary of the pedestrian improvements that are included in plan includes 30 individual locations as well as several areas for widening. We're providing sidewalks. Go to the next slide. So with that holistic map assessment, we ended up with a hundred individual projects. We combined bicycle and pedestrian components along a corridor into an individual project and then we used scoring criteria to support the guiding principles to score those individual projects. Um the document itself has the criteria and uh under that that we used underneath the the different guiding principles and I can go into that in Q&A if you'd like. Um but essentially we scored all hundred potential projects. We came up with uh we were looking for 20 because of ties. We came up with 23 projects that that made the cut and we developed cut sheets which are included in in the planning document to show what could potentially be done along those corridors. We didn't include cut sheets for the projects that were already in a dice plan or already had work conducted on them because the designs had already been moved forward a bit. So we didn't want to redo work that had already been done. You can go to the next slide. Actually, go back one just one. I just want to mention a point on this. Sorry. In that map, the the lines are all linear corridors. Can you go back the other way to the map? Oh my gosh, I'm so sorry. I'll talk she does that. I shouldn't I shouldn't have messed up the the system. the lines. It's linear quarters, but I just want to to make sure folks know that there are crossing improvements included along corridors. So, uh in the map, it may not pop out as having pedestrian improvement, but there are those projects. Yeah. There you go. Thank you. Okay, I'm done talking. You can move forward. Thank you. So, the plan also includes several recommendations for new policies or new programs or in some cases expanded existing programs. I've listed some of these here. We've listed all of them on the slides and again if we can go into them in Q&A if you have questions. Um some of the ones I want to I want to highlight as what we've seen pop up uh repeatedly in the community comments are looking at ways that we implement no right on red. Um consideration of pedestrian connectivity via POS updating the B parking standards. can go to the next slide. We've heard several comments on greening and tree canopy encouragement, social walks and rides and maintenance of the active transportation facilities. So you go to the next slide. So when we talk about implementation and this is um the final chapter of the plan, the plan presents an approach for these priority projects that looks at both a near-term lower cost way of implementing improvements and a longer term higher cost way of implementing improvements. So there's the resurfacing which is a lower cost. This is something done during the seasonal routine maintenance of a roadway. It could include include pavement markings, signage. There's opportunities to put in glass four elements, but not the type of, you know, not uh curbs per se. Generally, not green infrastructure and no curve line changes, those improvements. And you can see this uh illustrated in this example in number two, the resurfacing. The second way of implementing this design approach is reconstruction. So this is not something that you can do with the the standard repaving and the maintenance. This takes a lot longer of a lead time. You're required to do feasibility studies and more design work could um so this reconstruction does allow for demolition and rebuild of curb lines. allows for perm line adjustments and the opportunity to provide street trees and other green structure. So for any given project you can potentially go from you know existing to resurfacing and then to reconstruction. But for a project if you were to get a grant opportunity and move it forward you could actually skip from one to three. It's just a question of do you have the money to staff the past time uh to do to do the work because these take quite some time. Uh the implementation plan or the implementation chapter also has uh several pages describing green streets the the benefits and the challenges of implementing green street infrastructure into roadway changes. Um it talks about the benefits and the tradeoffs. It has cost estimates for different types of materials and um provides some basic information that will be helpful for both the city and the public to understand when developing and implementing green infrastructure. So we can go to the next slide. Finally, the implementation plan includes section on funding and uh we've listed here some of the funding opportunities that are available to the city. Several of these, most of these are competitive grant programs you'd have to apply for. Some of them are funding that the city receives by formula and has a little bit more flexibility for inland. The plan also talks about the need to collaborate with different agencies when delivering improvements. Central Expressway and El Camino Riale are owned by uh the county of Santa Clara and Calrans respectively and we received a huge number of comments and concerns on that those roadways and and intersections along those roadways. The challenge for us is that we don't own those roadways and so in order to make improvements there we need to collaborate very closely with these agencies and we we do do that and we are continuing to do that. Calra is another agency we need to and are currently collaborating with when we're talking about things they're larger than the ATP for example the greatations go to the next slide. So I just gave an overview of what's in the plan. We presented the plan that you have in your packet to members of the public. Um we uh made it available to the public on I believe it was April 20th and it was out for about a month on collaborate MV. During that time frame we held a bic pedestrian advisory committee meeting where we presented the plan and received comments. We also um had a public meeting where we had members of the public attend and provide comments and had a nice discussion about the plan. So the themes and the comments that I'm going to talk about in the next two slides are what we received from that very recent public engagement. And uh we received received over 200 individual comments and that um that doesn't represent the total number of people. It was fewer numbers of people because people had multiple comments. So, one of the key themes was the BPAC wanted to make sure they could Oh, I'm so sorry. Thank you. Uh, the bicycle pedestrian advisory committee requested that we bring the final plan after we've made changes back to them. And so, we have scheduled a review by both the BFAC and this committee in August. So, you will see the final plan before it goes to city council in September. there was a desire to strengthen and add to the programs and policies section. There were some questions about um policies that were in the vision zero and the roadway safety plan and so we'll update the plan to make it clear that those two plans work together. there was a desire to provide more focus on pedestrian improvements in the active transportation plan and so we've identified some we we reviewed the plan we believe that there are strong pedestrian require or improvements and recommendations in the plan but they could be the plan could be revised a bit to highlight those uh there was some questions about inconsistencies particularly on the cut sheets for the priority projects and so go in and make sure those the narrative and drawings are consistent. Can you go to the next slide? And there was a desire for us to better highlight how the active transportation plan advances and um specifically we'll add some language about how it can coordinate the biodiversity and urban forest plan and other sustainability related. There was also a request to add performance metrics and outcomes and to uh report back on how well we are doing in implementing the plan. So we're going to be adding language policies program section that and I did not include it in here. It was an oversight. There was desire for us to add some practices to the plan including an existing conditions uh report that or brought to the BPAC several years ago and so we are reviving that updating it. Well, not updating it but revising it and are planning on. So with that you can go to the next slide please. terms of the timeline um for the last the tail end of the plan I mentioned the community engagement that we did in April May we are here in that sunflower colored line in June after we receive the comments here from you and any members of the public staff are going to be using the month of the rest of June and the month of July to revise and update the plan so that we can deliver a final plan to BPAC to the CTC to the public and to council for adoption September. So we are the end of my presentation. We are here tonight to request that the crew review and comment on the public draft of

if I may before um the committees both the committee and the public um I just wanted to note that Chair Hicks is now present and all committee members Thank you. So with that um the next question is do any members of the committee have questions on

I didn't get a chance to read um questions. Yes. So, I've read them. So, I guess we could proceed in one of several ways. Um, member Mallister, you could uh summarize a question or two or

Yeah. No, I'm not gonna Yeah, I would follow up on some of the questions. Okay, let's put this in context where I'm coming from. So, uh, so this starts 2022. Lots been going on. Uh, new new terminology, new focus on certain a lot of things. So, I'm coming into it sort of, okay, what's what's going on? Still getting my footing up. So my perspective will be different than what these folks have had. So it's it's so it's just trying to help me analyze it. So going forward and my position on the council, what I look for, how it will benefit the entire city of 85,000 and how we use our limited funds to projections like that. you know, I'm data driven and I always like to see that to justify your project and type my So that being said, I'll follow up with a few of my questions. U we can take off one. So I had a one particular well one question the uh no particular order. There was one street put on your list as Carol. I've been watching Carol thinking for 65 years almost basis. I grew up in that area. Has anybody proposing two sidewalks on both sides? And one of my questions is

I can save comments. I'll save. So I think we would we would need to go back into some of the the project files to understand if one of the walk audits went along that area um that addressed Carol. One of the things I want to note is that at the master plan level like this, the recommendations are based on generally data that we have say GIS maps information that we can evaluate at a citywide level. So looking at the width of roadways, looking at destinations for example Carol School and I believe that is why the recommendation was put in for the sidewalks and When the city moves forward with a project, they'll use the master plan as a starting point needs to validate tenant. So there are going to be opportunities as a project moves forward for us to look at conditions, the actual conditions on the ground. Um and we may need to revise some of the recommendations but this is our very good estimate what we believe was possible given the data sources given the fact that we're doing it. So when those priorizations sorry was you're going to wait until you get to that point you're ready to do it

general view that you plan to go through just validate

yeah as we bring them on online as part of the CIP process and start funding individual projects a good idea by more of the exact scope about these.

Okay. And I also asked the question about landing major roadways. I asked the question about you know our public transit again being big picture our shuttle and it was that you show the runs but was that maybe it wasn't the police to make the discussion but I would think our goal is somebody said we'll get people out with cars I would think this would be overriding consideration is that if we get our shuttle going a lot of these projects won't accomplish I mean shuttle accomplished a lot of concerns. So that's why I didn't see anything saying, you know, if we do this, you know, if we put more money into public transit, this will solve this problem. So that was a question.

Okay, if I get to a comment, let me stop because I might get to the comment. Um the focus of this active transportation was on bike and pedestrian uh transportation relapse in a lot of different ways. We you know we have the TDM, we have the active transportation. We will be evaluating the shuttle moving forward. Um, shuttles are difficult when somebody wants to just get down the road to go to the library quickly and by the time they wait for the shuttle, they could have gotten on their bike and gotten there or maybe like stroller onto the shuttle is not as easy as walking there. Um we want to make sure of our wide transportation approach but we will continue the shuttle more often. Um the other question there was I asked about the benchmark number of comments that were considered to particular item and I said what is the high concentrate? You mentioned that you used the heat map to identify locations that high concentration just trying to quantify it for me considered high concentration 5 10 20 30 40.

So um we reached out to the consultant who had developed the map to understand the math behind developing that map. uh we received about approximately 600 comments, right? And the consultant took those 600 comments and basically broke it into equal groups of three. So higher areas would say have um you know 200 comments, 200 comments, two

that makes sense. I don't know if we have heat map

you put a heat map up there more than I was just wondering how

right right the heat map so it's a relative rather than an absolute number if I if I can explain it so it's it what the way the map is developed is you take the individual points where people had a question and a comment and then you see how many points are in that area and you blend together into what you saw as the heat map

Lauren this is you

Tracy do you want to comment because you were the yeah this is Tracy from from Nelson Nyart and they developed the maps.

Hi everyone, how are you? uh the the heat map as Lauren was discussing that is presenting the the challenging the in the sense the density of responses that any given area within the city um I'm sorry I just had a brain fart the word I was looking for received that's it received any given area uh in the city received that was during the existing conditions component of the project that we conducted this uh mapping activity. Uh it also contained all comments that have come in through um ask and uh as well as comments from walk audits, small group meetings and all the engagement activities that we conducted are compiled in that map. Um so the the as a heat map works the higher concentration of comments that um came in in any given area um is reflected in the heat map by a darker color. And if it's a lighter color then it was a lower concentration of comments. uh we'd have to go back into the um the map itself to look at the the absolute number of comment for any one given area. Um but again the the map reflects the um number of comments through the intensity of the color for any given area. And then what Lauren was referring to in terms of three um relatively equal groups was referring to the um when a project was scored. When the projects were scored um community the the density of community comments in the area of the project was one of the scoring uh criteria. So if an area had a high density, if a project area had a high density of community comments, um that put it into the the third like the highest category of community comments in a given area then it received the highest uh school points for that particular category. So I think you had comment you had questions um regarding the map and then also the scoring criteria

comments. I want to try to sense get a sense of how you got how this plan would evolve and was it 20 comments? Was it 100 comments? I would like to know how many comments became higher density or low density or so.

We can we can figure that out. But I guess the the heat map is a translation of the number of plummets relative to each other and you're wanting the absolute per for the density of the area.

We can get that for you.

Yeah.

Okay. Thank you. Um and then there was um on the California street clean street program I asked if there was a midway progress report and it'll set post construction. So there is no midweight report. It's just at the beginning that you'll ever report.

I mean, so I'll let either either one Ed or or Robert jump in here, but it because it is a pilot, we are taking precount numbers and post uh count numbers. With that data, a determination will be made and we will see how that project uh change the area and the use and and make it and that will be reported out. My understanding is at the end of summer early fall time frame as we finish collecting the data.

Okay. So, we're getting and one comes about the uh or question question that and I guess that also reply to number of accidents and stuff so

well the evaluation I did for structure projects and it was came of thought so I asked will this has this been done yet or is it done before because it was supposed to say did it uh did it actually the project actually get the intended impact of travel. So caps is going to go forward but it says and post construction is that going to be part of policy then

that is one of our recommendations. Um and other questions sort of technical ones. Yeah, we're getting the final review in August package. What do you expect from us CTC since it's a final project?

So, we're taking all the comments that we received. We're going to incorporate them in the plan. We will bring it the plan to both BPAC and CCTC prior to going to council. So we will be looking for recommendation from CTC that council will adopt the final act of transportation plan.

So that will include but you'll just we'll accept the document. You're not looking for any additional information or corrections or thoughts on that with that?

Not at that time unless there's some glaring issue.

Okay. Uh and then my one question that I said I would ask figure 14 distance between district crossings and I kind of understood how what do you mean from crossings street? No, it's the it's the length of a roadway between places where pedestrians are leaving. So, it's basically block length.

Okay. So, I see a lot of blue. 500 ft. Okay. I was just looking at my neighborhood and I saw So, I see a lot of blue. But that means distance between pedestrian crossings is are these uh marked crossings?

No, it just means where you are legally allowed to cross. So, it wouldn't be classified as jaywalking, right? So at the corner of your block you can cross at a legal

you can cross any okay

so the idea is some of the bigger stretches an example would be a rank store right which we're working on right now as a project there are ver some very long stretches where there is no way for a pedestrian to cross from one side of the street to the other and so that's that's what that length is identifying where those gaps are in our pedestrian network. Okay. Yeah, that Yeah, that makes sense. The person I'm looking at. Those are the my questions for those questions. Okay. Council member.

Okay. Um trying to organize myself. Okay. So um we received quite a few different letters with a bunch of different comments and so I just wanted to give staff opportunity. Well, so for example, the letter that um the committee received from um not US middle school district had like five items that they could highlight commented on any of those or would it be similar to I guess I'm trying to understand how we will incorporate the comments. So you shared with us deep hat um but we've also gotten other

Yeah. So I'll just quickly say the comments that we summarized were what we received during outreach. So it wasn't just PPAC comments. Those are comments we received from uh collaborate MV of APAC our outreach meeting. We also had our ATP pack acronyms at PAC and PAC are included in in these. I will say the letter is newer than than this list that we provided, but we will go back through those that we were trying to um categorize the comments received into kind of themes and they're they they seem to fall in these same groupings and I think that the letter from the school district is similar. Um we it has obviously a focus more on the schools and getting the kids safely to school. Um, safe routes to school is a program that we will continue to support and we'll be bringing to BPAC and every and CTC later next fiscal year. Um, but it was part of our scoring criteria that those projects have um risen to the the top of our priority list and we'll incorporate those components as we move through. Yeah, I think you know the and I was just going back because I think the AT but the the ATP does reference safe routes to school.

Um perhaps just I'm trying to think about I know we have our safer to school program. We also have the ATP we're trying to adopt. the staff feel that it kind of peppered throughout the document is the best route or to staff think that writing like a little section that says if you're school that puts like encompasses I I just looked at staff because I think when people think of the ATP they might and what I not too much but the ATP is very readable.

Yeah.

And so I wonder if there might be if staff is open to like a call out section on that.

Absolutely. since we got

Yeah. And we we can do that. We also have education as part of our policy or policies and programs that we want to continue to promote not just in the schools but throughout the city. Um I will say our safe rout has not officially been adopted by council.

So we will be bringing that next year with for adoption. Um so with that we're exists but it's not adopted. It was yeah we

sorry that's a question

yeah so it's been identified as a program

and a priority but was the plan has was never adopted so we will be bringing that to council where we're we're going to strengthen it and bring it to council as an adoption to ensure that it continues to support funding as we move forward. So

it wasn't adopted as in conjunction with our vision zero plan

no they're separate vision zero and local roads and safety are paired together. Okay. Thank you. All right.

Yeah.

Thanks. Okay.

Start fishing my head. I know very little, but I do have

Okay. There are a lot of smaller transportation plans to help us try and wrap our arms around

transportation city.

I put those three together

in my mind.

They have the same PM

usually. That's probably why

and I thought we had adopted that. Okay.

Yeah. Um, I had a a question about um how the ATP can address the last what the last 12 mile issue that I think the city's been facing for a very long time. So, one of the things in here is about or one of caser's question um was uh related to our sharing programs. So, um I know that we our our bike share program is open for applications, but we haven't received any, but we have received a scooter share. Is staff seeing that people are mode shifting from like bike share to a scooter share program? Is that just like the current climate? Did that help address the half half mile issue a little bit better? Sorry, just kind of that broad. Yeah, I I wouldn't say that it's one or the other, but what we have found is the vendors want to be able to provide both at the same time. So, um it's not one or the other, but they want to do both. And right now, there is the moratorum on the scooter share program. So, we're in the process of updating that. We're hoping that with the update of and repealing of that that will hopefully get both bikes and scooters back. Okay. Um when talking about the guiding principle um related to slide 13 and I was trying to find all that. So when we're talking about access and equity define kind of the rubric. So when we're talking about the guiding principle, what does access and equity mean through the lens of the AT?

So I I it's in the appendex in appendix A if you want to take a look at it. Um access and equity is defined uh or appendix.

It's the it's appendex A.

And then there was one attachment to this all in one. Yeah. And I don't actually it would be page 79 in the PDF.

So it uses three

table one.

Table one. Yeah. It uses three scoring criteria. So the first one is supporting lower income residents. And you can see under the metrics what it looks at. It's US census data and it's looking at household income. It also looks at filling a gap in an existential sidewalk network by Carol.

So that's a yes no

that's a yes no and the reason why that I mean that's under access but it's also under equity because that devices okay

and then it also looks at whether it fills a gap in all ages and abilities bicycle and so that would be the low stress network you're looking at. So class four bikeways or um class two bike lanes on low streets or bicycle could be considered about all ages bikeways. How do you feel that ATP and I one of the things I was like reflecting on is the I like the guiding principle. I think when it comes to the score scoring criteria, I think it doesn't necessarily feel like there's gap in safety when it comes to access particularly for some of the neighborhoods that may fall into scoring the first scoring criteria when I talk about lower income residents because they might be in um higher volume like area where the state feel as And so I just wasn't sure how we can incorporate that into um you know we've been trying to make improvements on like California store but I think the speed with which cars go um may still feel like an impediment to I forget the categorization But you know like there's the confident biker the less sorry but concerned maybe yeah and I those folks might um alone and I don't know how we can talk about how as we're doing the ATP we're making people feel like that's a gap but I don't know if you feel that feels like that ATP can address that in a different guiding principle or how we might address that. We can circle back to it, but I just thought part of the the AT is to address mode shift, but it's also I think ideally a way for people to feel more confident or safe to do so.

And I'm just trying to figure out and to me that's a bit of like equity for everyone to feel that. You know, some neighborhoods you may feel safer to do so than in others. Um I'm not sure how

so the the scoring criteria also includes the safety and comfort

uh guiding principle and that that uses data that directly addresses crash history and other safety concerns.

Um

like the second

yeah the second the second one. So if you think about two projects that are exactly the same with all the other scoring except for the access and equity particularly the lower income with this scoring metric this the the project that is in the lower income neighborhood will bump up

if that makes sense as we're looking at the project

and as we're looking at the ATP to be able to help inform the behavior Correct. Also, I would add, it's not exactly the same, but there's also the supporting uh under mobility and connectivity, there's also supports the school children. So, if it's within a certain uh uh radius of a school, so it's not it's kind of peppered throughout it. So,

but I just, you know, I think that's one of the uh themes or that I was

Yeah. thinking about.

Yeah. The other thing I would I do I look here is how many maximum points do you have for each guiding principle. So for the for the access and equity guiding principle it's a maximum of 27 points and then for the safety and comfort it's a maximum of 3. So in this situation safety and comfort weighs heavier than access equity but those are really that and then mobility connectivity which is 22 points. Those are really the top we were looking at

and the scoring criteria went through BPAC.

Yeah,

it's just been last year with other projects. Yeah. And I'm thinking too like how does this document or the guiding principles are for current but also future as we're adopting project after project in relation to the housing element

you know and I'm also thinking about how the 10th school site is going forward and the infrastructure that we can create there to um make it a heard it most questions.

Yes.

And then and then lastly had a question about the funding and collaboration. So um one of the things that this is about coordination related to funding but how um might we be able to highlight coordination related to projects. But sometimes a user is on a city street that goes to town that goes to just thinking about the comments we've been hearing recently from residents about their user experience on certain um areas they they are moving from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. How do we a way that we can address that in the ATP or make that work? How do we share that with residents? So yeah, um I think sometimes the feedback comes our way, but the city isn't able to do anything because it's right away, EA right away. Um they're traversing over the county expressway onto the city street. Um and address that or how do we because I feel like that's an like a so we looked at the projects together, right? you know, a person is going to travel and processed from what we know and um what where it would have been affected if they might not have scored so as high and how quickly we could deliver the project. So, it doesn't mean we didn't consider these projects. It's just it it makes a project a little hard to deal with. Uh we will continue to look at them. a lot of them are on our our busier streets that are used more regularly. So, um they're it's it's part of the projects. The reality is we are in an area where we are crossing um other jurisdictions. So, so we will continue to work and partner with agencies to deliver these projects. They they ask, it's just that there's some patience and understanding that they're they're not as easy as the projects that are solely in our jurisdiction. Um we do also have in there scoring criteria gap um completion. It's not quite the same thing but it's where you know you have a route from Sunnyvil that drops you into not the same type of mountain. Um an example would be what's happening along Evelyn. Um Sunny is in the process of completing Evelyn. We're going to pick it up and try and complete it on our end. So we will continue to work with projects like that as well through this process. You think that we could in the AT could like the different jur like I know the different jurisdictions are called out but could we put like as an contact information different juris like different entities I don't know I'm just I'm gonna ask I'm gonna ask the why the benefit of putting the contact information

well I I because I think we highlighted it and we touched upon it, but the city because of because our roadway is so shared. I think that residents often express comments and do not know where to turn. And if this is an active transportation plan, it may I think it would be helpful for an appendency to say like our collaborative partner, oh CCA, this is like their website here or like I have a question about whatever, right? I almost like you know like wayfinding but for like

right

but in a different type of way. And so I think one of the things we've been trying to do is is in our education is make it easier for our residents to understand what the resources are, what the roots are, etc. You know, and part of it is what are the different partners so they can understand some of the constraints we're under because um

yeah okay that helps that helps to understand the background behind that. Um

I mean it's just a question and staff would put into it but if not that could be too um

and then um we we can look into it. The reason why I asked the question is I didn't know if something like that would be a plan that's not be updated very frequently right because those things sometimes change. So maybe it's another mechanism.

There might be another way to share the information

and that's fine too. just asking staff because I I feel like recently there's just been an uptick in comments that I've been receiving

and so you know and I live in a neighborhood where I'm welcome. So like you know I think there's different things people are experiencing and I and I want to have a more satisfac I want residents to feel like they have a more satisfactory answer and I want to provide a vehicle for that. I'm just asking that what you might think as we're talking about adopting if there's room there somewhere else. Um, look forward to that.

Yeah, those are my question. Thank you. Okay,

think of more while I'm asking. Um, so my question is the good thing about going last is a lot of good questions have been asked. First, I'm gonna circle back and ask in a slightly different way what member Kamay said about how we incorporate these latest comments. um because I think people we and the various people who sent us letters, groups mostly um over the past day or two uh have put a lot of thought and work into it and I want to make sure that that we have a rubric to capture that work and not just have it all slipped away somewhere. And so um at the same time often we take straw holes for this kind of thing. And I think there may be two men I I'm asking for your suggestions but I think you know we may come up with 30 different can you include this and can you include that and it may not be best to do straw hold on all of those. Um I'm thinking that a possible rubric would be I thought you had excellent categories. um you know when you the categories I forget how many there were maybe five um and they were having memorized the names of the category I put it right here but they were uh more on pedestrianism uh more on metrics more on including sustainability and there were several others perhaps we could put our our comments under those categories and you could consider them but not for example like member Kame's latest um comment question which I fully support of uh you know giving a little more information on our adjacent and regional agencies transit a transportation agencies um you know maybe that it feels to me like you don't like we don't have to vote on that and you say yes or no tonight but it could be put under some rubric one of the titles And then you go back and decide whether it's possible, impossible, or possible to do in a slightly different way than member may suggested.

Is that what

we're not voting right? But I want to make sure that the comments don't evaporate. So do you have any suggestions to make sure that is putting them under those categories a helpful or do you have another

I think that's helpful. If there are broader categories that you think we should also consider that we didn't categorize, I think that would also be very helpful.

Yeah, I think we've received I we received a high volume of comments for these categories. So, if there's something you think is fitting that would be really helpful for us to make sure that that gets included in the plan. Uh and then yes, if there's specific addition additional comments, yeah, please um and I have to think on the way to convey back to public where they're addressed. I think I think we've come up with some, you know, very clear ways how we plan on assuming the plan and the public sees that. that I I hear you and making sure that they understand we we received the comments and um logging those appropriately.

Okay.

Yeah.

Yeah. I don't

Okay, good. I don't think I have to ask on any further. Um so, and then I have a question. Um I agreed with the the people who commented on uh that the plan could be stronger in terms of pedestrianism. Um and uh related to that um in particular there's an area that talks I'm going to come up this question from multiple angles. So, I don't see I see a there's a table with a minimum of different lane widths and sidewalk widths and it says that sidewalks will be a minimum not but a minimum of five feet. Um I and then it said sidewalks should be widened in certain places. My um experience with widening sidewalks is that one of the big triggers is building height. So this relates to council member Kay's comment on we in large part the um the ATP is talking about conditions now but we expect conditions to change and then you also mentioned things that are have been specified in precise plans are not specified here but I'm still left wondering how we're addressing um because not all additional building height will be in um size plan areas. So, how we're addressing the need for like I'm a huge I'm a huge advocate for improved pedestrianism. I don't think every sidewalk needs to be more than five feet in the whole city. I I even think unincorporated areas can have no sidewalks sometimes. So, what is there a mechanism anywhere in here for higher building and desert development to trigger wider side? because I didn't catch.

And I I'm trying to understand your question just a little bit more clearly. Um, by higher buildings, you mean I'm sorry, this is me being the engineer here. Are you talking where the building hits the sidewalk or are you talking that there's just more people in a building and so therefore more need for sidewalk?

Yes. Where there's more people?

Yes. Okay. If we just wanted to clarify warehouse in the middle of a single family neighborhood, which I don't want us to do, but if we were, it would not be more the sidewalks, right? But yeah, we have

got it.

Multi-story apartments

um are what triggers the need for you know I go to Chicago they have 30 foot sidewalks because they have because it's next to a tall building.

Yeah. Okay. Sorry. Just needed to to understand there a little bit more. Um so yes, you're correct. If there's a precise plan, we're not trying to change a precise plan. And the event is when those projects come on board, we follow or come online, we follow that.

As projects um are identified in the CIP as becoming a project, the plan is that they'll go through transportation planning first. That will involve outreach. that will involve conversations with our CDD partners um and others in the understanding what's going to happen and what we expect to happen based on zoning and just the conditions that we see um housing element changes whatnot before we kick this project off the first thing we will be doing is validating that the assumptions made and the ATP are still correct this is a plan that will probably be updated between every 5 to 10 years View is going to change a not in the next 5 to 10 years. And a project that isn't touched until year eight, the assumptions will likely have changed. And so the first thing we will do as we bring these projects on board is do that validation. Talk to the neighbors is, you know, is it the street parking? Is it the sidewalks? And just identify what the intent for buildout is in that area and if zoning has changed, housing element affects that area. So, um, where the five foot comes into play is that is the current, um, recommended standard for the city as new projects are coming online. Um, new developments in our right away are being asked to put in five foot sidewalks, though. We're not just going to create a project just wide a sidewalk, 5T. I think what I'm asking in addition to this is is there anywhere I didn't see anywhere in the ATV a recognition that as we densify which we're doing a great deal of and we're doing a great deal of through the housing element and through legislation from Sacramento for example SB79 I see no reference anywhere to the fact that when you densify when you add more people you need wider sidewalks in the areas that you're deathifying unless everybody has an underground garage and a home. Um, so I see not a sentence in here about that, but I I read a lot. So maybe it is in there. And that's what I'm asking. Is it in there anyway? In any way.

It's not.

Okay.

It is not in there in that in that in that. Yeah.

Yeah. And I don't think well now I'm going into the points but I don't think we wait until the 20 foot building is built and assess and then say we do more than a foot. Okay so that was one question. Um and then uh my second question, so also in that same table of minimum lanes and sidewalks and so forth, it said that the minimum roadway lane was 11 ft, but I'm reading NACTO guidelines and also hearing that El Camino Rail has narrower. So why is our minimum when I'm hearing about nine 10 and a half why is our active transportation plan arguing for a minimum of 11? So 11 ft is what is needed for trash trucks, buses, emergency vehicles. So if there is only one lane provided and then there's a vertical barrier, they need that space to to transit. I'm not going to say that that's an everywhere situation, but that is our starting point for most situ for most projects. If there are multiple lanes, like on El Camino, um they do go down to 10 feet, but at least one of those lanes is on the 11th lane. So, if we have multiple lanes, we will definitely um shrinking the lane width, but 11 feet is what we used for our planning purposes again because we don't have exact survey data everywhere. We also didn't want to put in a 10-ft lane. Then we get out there and now we have a 9 foot lane and I can't get the trash truck through or the VTA bus can't make it through. So, um it is our our starting off point. It doesn't mean that we can't look at areas where 10 feet makes sense, but we're starting with 11 feet as our So to me, the if you say 11 ft, it doesn't even say 11 ft is the minimum for lanes that are going to have emergency vehicles. It says it it reads that it's the minimum for all roadways. So maybe I mean I'm bleeding into comments, but perhaps we could there could be two lines. one for emergency vehicles and one for second second third floor plan which I hope

could I ask a clarifying question are you referring to table two the basis of design that is

on the screen

oh thank you

on the screen I it's a little hard to see that so that's in appendix B which talks about the pet sheet development

right

so just so everyone knows this was the basis of design that we used when we were developing concept plans for the priority projects. So that that table just describes these are the parameters we were looking at when we were estimating what we thought could fit in each of these corridors.

So it's not for everything, but it's for those cut sheets examples.

Okay, since I'm asking questions, I'm not going to go into great detail on how it confuses. Um, uh, okay. So, and I generally thought it was great, by the way. It feels bad to start with questions because it's always the parts that you love out of the hundreds of pages. Um, so also, now I know what your answer should be to me on this is that I voted for it. So, but also uh in scoring uh priority projects, there's a category of safety and comfort. And to me, the for me one of the largest elements of safety and comfort. And this actually links to council member Kit's question on equity because it's also what you find most in the lower income areas of mountain cities as well is a lack of shame to the point that you just feel like you can't walk anywhere. Um yet that I mean I would say that's almost the number one thing that stops me and people who refuse to walk uh places uh is a is um you know a lack of shape. So I was a little confused about why that didn't it appears somewhere else. It appears under I think biodiversity I think under biodiversity biodiversity but I I actually think I actually think this is a problem that runs through all of our plants. We talk about biodiversity for animals which I'm all for ahead of needs of people. And I really think that in terms of trees we're doing it mostly so that people in lowincome areas can walk horses. I mean, I have to say the place people refuse to walk with me most is when I go to visit my friends who live in an affordable housing development and nobody's working any street on large stretches. So, that was a I get that's a question. Why is why is shade not a part of comfort? And you can tell me because I voted for it that way. I don't know that I have a great answer for you. I'm going to be completely honest. Um I think that greening has just always by default gone into sustainability. Um I'm not saying that that's the right answer. Um I do think that you're correct that a mind should change when we're talking about active transportation. is probably necessary, but it for this one it fell under sustainability. Um,

oh, I like that answer really a lot.

Um, you know, I think we've always always just thought of greening is how we make something more sustainable or it's part of our greenhouse gas or something of that nature. And I think we just need to understand there needs to be a shift in kind of the approach as we develop these projects. Okay, that's that's fabulous answer because I really think we need to think of it how it's useful or not useful at all. Um, and then this getting towards my last questions. Uh can you tell me this may relate to uh member Mallister's question on how uh when you're going to walk the streets and know because on some of them the conditions really change block to block or even within one block. Um, so the one I'm thinking of that I'm really familiar with, but I think it re I think that many of the streets are probably in this condition is um, Leam. I used to when I had children in grade school, which was quite I would take them down um, the downtown to Castro school all along them. If I read the ATP, right, it says that that's going to be um the sidewalks are going to be wide. But in many of in much of that, not all because it really changes even midb block it changes. If we widen the sidewalks, first I don't think sidewalks need to be widened there because because I have never experienced walking to school. I've never experienced or we scooted out of school. I never experienced any problems with conflicts with anyone or difficulty using it. But secondly, if you widen the sidewalk, you're going to either take away somebody's front yard, which I don't think is going to happen, belongs to them, or you're going to take out the planting strip and the trees, which I also don't think is going to happen, or you're going to take out the parking, which is also probably not not going to happen because there's not a lot of parking there, and there's cars all over the place. So, I don't understand how and where that street is going to be wide. I not street, sorry, where that sidewalk. It's one of the main places that it says there's going to be sidewalk widening all along the way, but honestly, I don't see it. I don't see it. Um, so I'm looking at the cross-section for leam, which I'm assuming is where this colony is coming from. um one where it is coming from. It doesn't mean it needs to happen this way and we would evaluate it as we go through because widening a sidewalk is not a cheap endeavor. Um but Laam currently has a 12 foot lane and an 8ft parking strip. And so the end result would be an 11t lane and an 8 foot parking strip. So you you end up with one foot on each side. So they have given it to the sidewalk from the lanes. The idea is in narrowing the road, you're slowing the traffic down. We can explore other ways to use that two foot buffer. Um as we we look at it and does that make sense?

It does except when you're actually there uh you would be taking out all their trees and removing their planting. Yeah.

So I don't know. I mean, yeah, on a piece of paper it sounds good, but in reality, I think

we would take it look good. Yeah.

Yeah. And so that would happen as part of our our validation.

So, okay. Yeah. So, I'm that's probably that is the street I'm super There's also there are other places along there. One is like a civic block next to Eagle Curb with with beautiful. I don't think we're going to take them out and ride the sidewalk. And there's very few people ever. So there's no need for

Yeah. I don't I don't think we would take away our greening,

right,

to add a foot of sidewalk. That is if we're prioritizing our our um as we're moving through this um a width one one foot of sidewalk width is not going to go for the uh historic or trees or any of we are not going to replace imperous area with purpose area

is the engineering way of saying

there's no reason to widen that sidewalk. No.

So, so I believe Okay. So, I will not go into comments on that. Um, and let's see if I had any more. Um, I guess my last question is, but maybe maybe you kind of answered this. How or when do we go from the resurfacing improvements to the reconstruction improvements? Um because the reconstruction improvements were really good and added canopy made sidewalks and bike lanes uh usable which I believe with you know extreme heat they pretty much um in some. So those are great, but are they so like how do we ever get there? Are they really pipe dreams? Are they are we going to end up in the in the resurfacing area where everything has boards everywhere and we never get any trees or how do you see that? So right now the quickest way for us to do reconstruction project is getting either grants or funding from from other partners. An example would be the Rankstar great uh the Rankstar project that we just kicked off recently in transportation that includes um CALR money that helped us do the the design and planning for that. Um another example would be our Evelyn portion which we just recently got a

is it measure B?

It's a VT measure measure planning grid. So, so what is really nice about these cut sheets is it shows that we have public engagement. It shows that we have a plan and it helps us as we go for these funding um grant applications that are competitive. Those are two big of two big scoring areas and so we will continue to go after a lot of those to help um accelerate though the process is still long those projects. Um, in the interim, Robert will have his annual paving projects and the goal is to to make to continually make things better as we're going through this process.

I'll add to public works director Boyer's answer here, Robert Gonzalez, principal civil engineer, civil infrastructure group. So along with looking for opportunities on the grant side, I'll just explain a little bit about the pavement maintenance side to see what opportunities that provides as well. Um so when a when a when a street segment is first placed, it's at 100%. And the the goal here from a from a city perspective is to maintain the condition of that for as long as possible before you get to a state of deterioration where it's failing and kind of trigger a reconstruction. So in between the time where it's newly constructed and the time where it's failing from a pavement management perspective, you want that as long as possible. You want to preserve that. that we are doing overlays and preservative treatments all along the way. Five years, 10 years as the need arises. You're doing the crack sealing, simple snakes on the ground, you're doing a slurry seal, you're doing cape seal, you're doing all kinds of these maintenance efforts such that you delay that. So that's the the on my side of the coin. I I want to delay that so I can reverse preserve that infrastructure at the end. But at the very end of that, yes, there will be a point where the PCI gets to a point where I cannot do any more maintenance to that road without reconstructing it. And that would that would trigger these crosses as you see them. So if we're going to do a reconstruction, then we would be pulling this out and say, what opportunities do we have to deliver these these images? So there's there's there's obviously two conditions here that we're talking against. One is maintaining the condition of pavement and then the other one is if we have an opportunity such as a grant we would look at those are really better.

Yeah. And um Edango's work director I just wanted to add that um you're hearing multiple avenues how we could get there. Um we may you know as director Ber mentioned we may get there by just skipping ahead going from existing right to construction if we find a grant or there's a priority to really identify work because we do this on a corridor basis. It's not a lot by lot u it really needs to be identified as block by block efforts. So these are usually longer stretches.

Would you say corridor or block by block?

No we do this on a corridor basis.

Okay. And uh a quarter could be we're looking at this one quarter but we're going to implement a block at a time. We can't do it by parallel basis. We can't just do a little incremental. Um so there's that element. Um when resurfacing happens and we are implementing some temporary improvements sort of this resurfacing effort. Um we are already implementing a component of what the reconstruction is going to look like. And so the vehicle lanes which may already be accommodated and then it could be later that we come back and we're doing the reconstruction effort for those elements outside the vehicle lanes to put in the uh the upper protected headwinds next to the bike and the landscaping at that time. So it could be a phased approach. We've done the resurfacing. Now let's come back and redo the portions of the bike lanes and the protected Okay, but we should move on. U did uh any members come up with additional questions while we're okay. Uh if not, believe we are now uh to the public comment uh portion of this this agenda item. Uh would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person like to provide comment on this item? If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or approach the lectern. Uh we will take inperson speakers first and each speaker will have three minutes. Are there any speakers in person?

Yeah, I'm Barry Bur 325 Walker Drive. Been in town for 30 years about now. Some of you know a former member of the BPAC. my view to be back actually got things done instead of let's say a mouthpiece for wellfunded lobbyists designers and infrastructure salesman and so on. It's my view of where things are now. So with regards to this this will played out over the next many years. It is my intention to get myself back on feedback so I can be part of what I'll hopefully be a levelheaded moderate you. I will really get things done with benefit and satisfaction. Now, you weren't here, Alison, and so before council person, um I stated that frequently we're seeing protected bike lanes being mentioned, except that's a big hole because what is a protected bike lane? And as I requested to the others, I request that you as chair especially bring in initiative to the committee to define what a protected bike lane is, should or shouldn't be versus the widely diverging view of protected bike lane 10 and 20 years ago versus what's being built in town. So that itself is a loose hole which needs to be better defined. Okay. Now, and also I feel that the best resource in Mountain View for consulting bicycle and pedestrian safety is the Mountain View police, the bicycle patrol. I've had conversations with them. They don't seem to have been consulted but their views on particular pieces of infrastructure in town. I think you know picture you know fully office fully equipped Mountain View police officer on a really nice mountain bike with their mountain bike but fully equipped cop on a mountain bike around town. Their view of safety is unique and I would urge greater engagement and involvement that the Mountain View Police Bicycle Patrol and Traffic Patrol be engaged and consulted on all of this because just in reading what you posted, which is great detail, I'm not seeing anywhere listing Mountain View Police Department and their bicycle patrol having input or being consulted on Thank you. Do I see no more inerson commenters? Are there any virtual comment?

Bruce England.

Hi all again. Bruce England. Uh you know I made comments earlier and I uh didn't catch that you were not already in the ATP section. I hope that you can just take those comments from there. you know, whatever notes were taken and apply to this, so I don't need to repeat them. If you want me to, let me know. Um, but I do have one additional comment. I didn't use my all my time earlier. So I have an additional uh comment which is that an important detail to me is that all of our parks and open space areas covered in the parks recreation strategic plan should be tied together in such a way that anybody who is walking and biking through Mountain View uh whether it's a longer or shorter route can stop at those locations and get water, use restrooms and things like that. The amenities that are needed to support a strong active transportation network. So, I'm not sure that was really covered as well as it should have been in the parks plan and if needed to have it covered in the ATP plan and tie together with the parks direct plan. That would be great. That was my additional comment. Thank you.

Thank you. So, more virtual commenters,

April Webster.

Thank you. Um, I want to start by thanking staff for bringing back the ATP to the BPAC and CTC in August. Um, I also want to say I support the overall direction of the ATP, but I'd like to see some key gaps addressed, especially around implementation, equity, pedestrian safety, community engagement, and climate resilience. First, um, adopt the complete streets and green streets implementation policy. Mountain View already has complete streets language in the general plan, but it's broad and that's not enough. um without implementation triggers, updated standards, delivery requirements, accountability, um complete streets can remain discretionary rather than the default way of building our streets. Second, adopt NATO's urban bikeway design guide, not the general guide as a city's default. Um, state-of-the-art has moved beyond paint onlyly bike lanes and the minimal paint and post separation, especially on high-speed or higher volume streets to make biking feel safe for families, older adults, um, new riders, people who are interested but cons but concerned, we need stronger protection. NACTO's um guidance says that in quotes motor vehicle lanes should be narrowed to support the widest feasible bike lanes and that again in quote general purpose travel lanes can be 10 feet at posted speeds of 35 mill um miles per hour or less while still supporting transit and truck use. Moreover, in constrained transit and bikeway context um that also says safety benefits um the protected bike lanes can outweight the slight risk of clipped bus mirror. Um, NACTO is built by cities for cities. It's recognized by FHWA and it's updated more frequently than local standards. So, adopting it would help Mountain View stay current with modern urban bikeway design. Third, update the city standard details because those engineering templates to determine what actually gets built. If those don't change, the plan won't fully translate into implementation. In addition, I'd like council to direct staff to add several supporting policies identified in the MBCSB letter, including a quick build program of policy, a traffic pling policy that prioritizes multi-ben treatments like roundabouts, curb extensions, and landscape bulbouts, and a bicycle boulevard and slow streets program to create a lower stress neighborhood network. I'd also like the city to use pavement reservicing as an implementation trigger for lowcost safety improvements. These include um paintonly changes like lane narrowing, lane reduction, buffers, daylighting, and interim curb extensions. Consistent with committee member Mallister's focus on efficient, cost-effective project delivery, piggybacking on plan re um surface resurfacing work is one way to make meaningful safety improvements when the streets are already being touched. This is what CALR does through their shop project. Finally, um the plan should bring back more of the pedestrian and equity context and shade and heat resilience should also be treated as active transportation and climate infrastructure and first class infrastructure. Um without canopy and shade, streets can become effectively unusable during the hottest part of the days, especially for people walking and biking. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Are there more virtual speakers? Yes, Cliff Chambers. Okay, Cliff Chambers.

Thank you. Uh, Cliff Chambers, resident of Mountain View and member of the Mountain View Coalition for Sustainable Planning. First, I got to give incredible kudos to staff and the consultants for an excellent outreach process. I've been involved with a lot of plans and I think this gets a an absolute gold star. Uh, April has set set forth a lot of the policy recommendations that we'd like to see. I'd like to talk about a couple of other areas. First, I think during the public process, we we talked a lot about protected bikeways, and I'm really happy with the broad network of protected bikeways, but we also talked about just bicycling and walking and neighborhood streets. And there was a lot of discussion about having a bicycle boulevard that's more like Bryant Street where bicycles have uh a priorities and uh it it gets incredible use and uh council member McAllister really talked about a numbers the generation of trips on bicycles for that very lowcost uh improvement in PaloAlto has been great. It's really disappointing that in the last bicycle plan we had a Monteceto bicycle boulevard that would go along that track. It really didn't go forward. It could have been Monteceto to Sterland to downtown uh Mountain View and on the other side towards Rankstoorf and Jane towards San Antonio Calra station. I'd really like to see that really uh evaluated more and included in the plan if at all possible. The other point is I I I do walk a lot and I I have really found that there is an absence in many key air intersections of accessible pedestrian signals particularly for low vision people like myself to get across the street. the crossings is really important and I I'm I'm glad that it's the theme for more pedestrian um improvements in the final plan, but I'd like to see that included. I'd also I think you know the placement of trees where there's really gaps because I really agree with council member Hicks when when there's more trees you're going to walk that path and I think the canopy placement and recommendations in the plan would be really important. And then my final point is on the policy that was talked about on the middlefield road about the temporary uh bike lanes on middlefield road. It's a safety hazard. I live right adjacent to uh Middlefield Road. I've seen a lot of near misses. That needs to be treated sooner than later so that we don't have an unfortunate accident in our city. Again, thank you for this excellent plan and I appreciate the time.

Thank you. Are there more virtual comments?

Yes, Daniel Hy. Daniel,

hello. Can you hear me?

Yes, we can.

Okay, thank you. Okay, so uh I just have a couple comments. I I really like the direction that the city has gone with the active transportation plan. I think that uh you know, it's it's a really good vision for what the future of the city should look like and where where we can go. And I I really appreciate all of the uh really the the strategy for how do we start protecting our uh cyclists out there. Um keeping in mind of course that uh good protected bike infrastructure is safer for all road users including motorists and pedestrians. Um so I think uh you know commenting in support there there are a few things that uh I really I think want to call out there there was a uh feedback session uh just just among some of us um a few months ago that I think was really productive and I I really appreciate every uh every opportunity where the city is able to engage directly with uh road users like like cyclists. And I I would almost like to see this a little bit more formalized in in our process uh where we can push a little bit early into the project conceptualization process. Just a little bit just not a huge year-long process, but just the right a little little bit amount of you know what what is a cyclist actually going to want to see here? Um so wanted to call that out. Um, I think in terms of projects, we have a lot of really good ones identified here. Uh, one thing that kind of pops out at me as something that is not really addressed very well is the downtown Castro pedestrian mall where we have kind of a blockage almost where we have a place that is in theory a very good cycling facility where we are not allowed to ride and then we have a lot of very bad places where you don't want to ride but where it is legal. Um, and so I I think we need to figure out a solution to that somehow. Um and uh you know there's a lot of other projects that that I'd like to see um in here you know just focusing on how how do we solve details you know after we've gone through and done corridor work we've created a whole strategy you know and there's just some problem that people identify a year later like how do we go uh ahead and sort of fix that that problem for those those users and be agile um to that. Um so that that's really uh that's really my comment. Thank you so much uh to city staff for putting this all together and uh that's my comment. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there more virtual commentators?

No, that's all. Okay. So, last call for public comments and I will now bring it back for committee member comments.

Callister, are you going to start us off?

Oh, I'd like to hear you first.

All right. Um, yes, I want to echo the thanks to staff. Um, it's been quite the journey figuratively and literally to to get to this point. Um, and I'm um just really grateful uh that we're here have we have the people before us tonight. Uh, one of the things I just wanted to highlight was I think some of the speakers mentioned the robust community engagement has been really critical I think between the popups working with our multilingual um outreach program to kind of going to these bespoke different groups um to get the input. We've gotten a lot of collaborative uh unique math map reviewviewes insight which is was really fun to read. I think overall this document was I would say like the most readable document I've read the city put together in my seven and a half years just which is wonderful because I think um it truly highlights kind of where we were where we're going and and our vision. Um the appendices are very helpful in terms of just kind of reaffirming what the document says, being able to go back. Um one of the other things that stood out to me as I was reading was um how this plan will talk to the other plans that the city is pursuing or has. I think that's really critical and thank you for highlighting for me the issue with our safe roots at school um plan that is uh needs to be adopted. I think um if there are and I can't remember in my reading you referenced the different plans but I don't think that they were out there on where they were out sorry um in the plan itself. Yeah, but I um

Yeah, but I but if if we're doing it, we might as well. I think the Sorry, if I can just So, they're called out plans we've taken to use to make this new one, but the other plans that we will work with is not so we can Yeah, I think I think so. Yeah,

especially

the puzzle pieces, how they work together is is great. Um, thought it was I don't know. I I enjoyed how it was broken up, like how do we get around, what are we doing, um, the demographics, um, the different like data points and resources, um, was was helpful. I do think um one of the things that I hope we can find a way to address is you know some of the I I think I I see two things before us. One is kind of if people have input as they're continuing to be users of our streets and and roads um transit, how they can provide that kind of continual feedback in a way that might be helpful. Um I you know I feel like right now residents have to put it into app mountain view but there has to be like a better repository for feedback on I liked this treatment but maybe not this and so folks don't need to come to CTV to tell us which one they do or don't like. Um and then I think the other is how we can um have like uh incorporate our our long-term planning. The city is changing and growing at such a rapid pace. It's great to adopt the ATP for now, but just thinking about the ATP for the future. you know, as I was mentioning, finding out that LSD is building the Los Altos district is going forward with that 10 school state and they're kind of moving at a pace that feels like to me faster than they had before, right? Although they think they they think that they're at that same um we need to be planning for that. um in addition to the different planning areas I would call within the housing element and I think over the next you know 5 to 10 years we're just going to see an increase in residents and so how does the infrastructure we're creating or the ATP going to be able to help accommodate that that's the only thing that I'm but all in the right direction I also appreciated like the rolling aspect of it, right? Like kind of anything with field and that can be, you know, a scooter, a bike, a stroller, a wheelchair, right? Um, and how we're thinking of all ages, all abilities, all backgrounds. Um, really speaks to the city's community for all spirit. So, thank you again. Thanks, Chair. You

So, member Mallister, are you ready now? Uh first this is one of the report and I've seen that throughout the city since my time here that it's thorough, it's comprehensive. I've always looked for funding. So if you're going to implement it, are you going to pay for it? And so we I think there was one report that was aspirational. I see some parts of that in here, but I I appreciate the time that put into it and it answers a lot of questions and it's good. It's a good report. It's one of the best reports I've ever seen on this one. And again, I haven't been through it, so it helps me get it on going. So, I appreciate the time for it. It does touch on areas that I find important. Now I'm not necessar I appreciate I voted for white things in the past. I understand they are helpful but I also want to put things in context from my perspective that there are many plans over the last month that I've seen that I got a you know we got decarbonization plan we got ATP plan we got biodiversity plan uh we got a bunch of plans and they're all going to be competing and they need to and they get them out of the aspirational implementation plan and this one uh you have a group, a community that's very passionate on bicycles and very outspoken bicycles and very supportive of bicycles. But I'm looking at the city is forward. I look at again I like the shuttle service. I like that we are not all bicyclists. In fact, I asked the first question was how many bices of Mountain View and you guys are working on that. So, I got to see how it integrates with everybody the traffic coming through. So, I'm putting this in my context is how I look at and going back. I asked one of the questions. Do you look at the road? So, let's go to Carol. Now I would like to have seen but as you go through here maybe it would be good to actually look at the streets because I said Carol I've been walking on that for 65 years is an account it is right going to a school so there are no sidewalks in my part of town but if you go to Carol and you walk down to the very end you will see a sign that has been respected by community members since no 2006 that says please do not travel down Carol park your cars people do that no one drives down Carol they all stop at sleeper and and park there and they all walk through so if somebody took the time to look at that said do we need sidewalks one I saw you had to do an improvement district sure that would have been interesting but by looking at the street and seeing it you would have saying we don't need to do this. I am fiscally more conservative by other people on the council wherever and when I see something like that I go we don't need to put a sidewalk in because there's no need to put a sidewalk in and that aspect of you're doing a lot and it seems going forward that to look at it do we need to do it so that we can really get the projects done that that want to get that you came up with 23 projects I really like that. I like you're saying, "Okay, we got a limited fun. We know it." This is where the demand is. And that's why I always ask you, show me the demand that needs this project. And so, yeah, I support things that will show that we people really need to do something to do it instead of we don't need cars in city mount. And I hear that sometimes from other from the your advocates or we don't need car, you know, let's get rid of the cars. That's not going to happen. And so we got to ask I asked early on the blending of this with the roads. And if I looked at all your things, there would be basically uh class three bike lanes throughout the whole city. So I'm just asking that there is a little more depth or data to that's acknowledged in here because you there's a couple things that you go like when I asked about the history and the response was the project's team did not consider history of the roadway or original intended use but we have a lot of people privacy and so I think that needs to be in consideration and not put in there and I appreciate the honest answer but instead instead of future use in the city school regarding sustainability. Well, we're not going to get there, but it's it's a there's a mechanism that there environment out there that they're all integrated and you have the task of integrating it with other things. So, that's when I say you've done a great work. Now, how are you going to benefit rest of the demands in the city going forward? That's why I ask her. Yes. Um the school district, you know, I've been asking the school district since 2012, put in buses and they say we can't afford it. So, u they won't even talk to the superintendent. I bring it up when he was over at Los Altos. Oh, no. I don't want to talk. There's a simple solution that if they did those, then all the things that they were worried about would be solved. or if we used our shuttle service to transport kids in the morning, that would solve a lot of the issues of safety. So, I'm looking at integrating all the other things to make things happen. So, that's it. I just please consider that there's a small group advocating really want it. they have the right to, but there's others people out in the in the city that say, "I need to get from point A to point B, or I'm going from there, and I don't want to buy. I don't want to drive." Uh, the cycles, e cycles, there was a small part in there about, you know, that's going to be big. I'm sure that's going to come out before you get going on anything else because there's a lot of concerns about bikes and you haven't addressed how you're going to come back to CCT with a policy on I recall ebikes and how they're going to be integrated into bike lanes and how they're going to be regulating. So that could be an interesting concept. But no, I for those people that are adamant about bike lanes, I think this is an excellent report. No comments, John.

That's it.

Okay. So, I will make my comments. You committee members can circle back and add comments of course if thought of any since then. Um, first I'll second what other committee members have said that this was an excellent really readable report. I think it it uh puts us um you know many steps ahead of where we where we were before um at least on paper and uh and I I guess the history of it from what I if I remember right is there was a separate pedestrian and bike plan and we're putting them together. I do agree with I agree with at least 90% of what our my committee members have said, if maybe a hundred. Um I uh I do agree with what uh member Mallister said that even though we're putting together what uh we need for bikers and pedestrians, it does have to that makes it kind of lack a little bit of the connections with the many other ways that we use our streets. Um, so I think that comment was well taken and maybe we can in the future combine this with a mass transit plan and you know uh other street use plans

multimotal

our multimodal for example. Um that said, um I so I guess my opening comment myself is that I believe we're in the midst of or we're on the verge of a bit of a revolution in transportation between um so that so that uh even though I like this plan very much, I think when we finish it, it'll seem immediately if not already update. Um, for example, there's a lot of talk of uh cutting our carbon footprint through more active transportation, but EVs in and of themselves are not not perfect, but there's something we didn't have really when we started this. Um, so we have to kind of put those into the calculus. Um so but between uh virtual commuting which is really change and hybrid work which is really changing when people use the streets um micromobility AVs automatic vehicles that may change mass transit a lot. I think depending on our public how we as policy makers address them, they could either make uh our streets more overused with ABS just cycling around all the time or um they could really uh help out with that first and last mile and strengthen mass transit. Um and then the whole delivery bots and drones and extreme heat. I just drove up through the Central Valley, so I've experienced it firsthand yesterday. um and extreme storms and flooding in the winter. I think the way we use our streets is really going to change. Oh, plus density. Uh you know, our various plans say that by 2050 we'll have between 100,000 and 150,000 people. You can believe that or not believe it, but we are taking you know steps to densify. So those will all massively change the use of our streets. So my first request is that in the same way we looked at our um council sustainability committee documents that this plan be a living document. I think that we're going to have to um continually refresh it and like uh council member Kame said give our residents ways to uh help refresh it continually and be open to that. I think it can't be a closed document. Um so and I on I would also like to include since much of it is uh related to sustainability I would like to include our uh sustainability staff in that it's you know I don't know how much you interfaced with them but I think part of our technical advisory committee

that and more.

Yes. Um so um and also uh as we do in the sustainability program uh do more pilots and I would like pilots that are more than just green paint and ballards and and plastic wear on the street. You know uh maybe uh things that are block by block or done in small pieces. Um but I would like to be open to pilots. Um in addition to that uh I'm going to highlight mostly things that various uh various groups and and individual holders uh have said that uh that I thought were very important. Um and I could go on for hours because there was a lot of good commentary but narrowing it down. One is that I I feel that bike boulevards and slow shared neighborhood streets could be emphasized more than they are. The um our school district MVWSD uh and um various individual commenters brought that up uh in various capacities. I think they're one of the least expensive things we can do uh is to highlight slow shared streets. I think there models out there in other cities um and that we could get a lot of that done and that a lot of people enjoy those more than the you know the green painting strip with the bollocks next to it. Um so that's one and uh yeah there's a lot of reference to that in the MVWSD letter. So in various ways. Um another thing is that has been mentioned several times and this was a subcategory. Uh one of the categories that you said that uh people members of the public made a lot of comments on is um kind of honing the metrics that are used. I've read that use is safety. In other words, a sidewalk or pedestrian route or bike lane that a lot of people are using makes those people in and of itself safer rather than one that that you know just a stray person here and there uses. So I would like us to observe what's working well and where do we see very few people and maybe in terms of using our resources wisely put more resources into the kinds of be they pedestrian improvements or bike improvements that um seem to be more popular. Um uh and I do agree with some of Council Member Mallister's comments on that that we really want to see the infrastructure that we that we put in well used. Um I agree with the there was a category about more focus on pedestrians. I've even heard some people tonight refer to this as a bike plan. And um it really it really has to be in terms of getting people out of their cars in cities that connect uh pedestrians with transit. There's a much bigger reduction in car use than in cities that don't. So I really want us to recognize pedestrians more, give them more, and not think of pedestrians as kind of the poor invisible siblings of bikers. Um because uh so some of the things I think we need to think more in terms of walk score. People walk more when there are things to walk to and that could be mass transit. It could be increased use of shuttle but it could also be neighborhood serving businesses. Making sure that we're not losing all of those. Um, it could be, um, I it could be wider so sidewalks where we're putting in denser buildings and there and vehicles like Cantalver buildings and so forth that allow us to do that in our objective design standards. Um, so just I think there are a number of things we could do to really think about pedestrians as having different needs than bikers. um often not always. Um let's see. Uh we had a someone emailed us on the subject of delivery bots and I think that's a really important and underappreciated topic. Um, I was just down in the UCLA area in a place where they have sidewalks that are probably four times the width of the ones we have in Old Mountain View and they have delivery bots that are um way bigger than the ones we used to have on the sidewalk. It's okay because their sidewalks are so wide and they're very few delivery uh bots, but they move along in jerky ways and stop in the middle of the sidewalk constantly. And if the sidewalk weren't 15 to 20 feet wide, you wouldn't be able to walk down the sidewalk. And the the report that we were given the last time we talked about delivery bots on the CTC, there was uh sort of the prediction there was going to be multiffold. There were going to be many more of them, many times what we now have. one or two delivery buss going down a a narrow sidewalk is not doesn't stop up traffic, but um you know, dozens and dozens of them not able to go move along very efficiently. Um they're motor vehicles and they're very heavy, too. And we have two companies in town that are doing delivery bots that if I if I remember correctly purely work on the streets, which is probably where delivery bots where large vehicles go basically. I think large vehicles belong on the street. Um so, uh let's see. And then I I guess the last thing I'll bring up is cost tradeoffs. Um, you know, I I really liked your cut sheets. I like the eventual place we would get to. Um, and I'm hoping we can find ways ways to get there. I'm thinking uh as member Mallister said if you walk a lot of these streets I think we'll find that some of the suggestions are really appropriate would really enhance the street and in other places maybe like Carol that you mentioned and Laam that I mentioned in other places we may not need to do them at all which would save us a lot of money. Um, so that may be a good next step to have some eyes on the street and see um which ones would really work and and which ones wouldn't. And the other is to combine it with our sustainability work. A lot of these things have multiple benefits. So if you see them as just an part of the active transportation plan, you might say it's too expensive. But if you see it as part of our sustainability plan or our community for all and equity or you know any number of other things or making density work um then it may be worth the cost. So I think that you know there were and I guess the last thing I'll say is we got a tremendous number of really good comments from the community and I'm hoping that all the letters we got with it from the various groups um uh like the mountain view coalition for sustainable planning and uh MVWSD the school district and various individuals that you'll put those under the categories because I'm not going to We have all so are there Oh, and I'll just highlight one thing that one of them said. Uh, somebody commented to me that we really need to make a distinction between um objective design standards, which are both the private portion developments and the um am I going to say wrong? Yeah. And the standard details for roadways, which are for public spaces, and that we need both. and that you're probably clear on it, but that the rest of us all have to be kind of more clear on the distinction. Um, oh, and somebody also said it's very important that we uh use the NACTO's book on uh pedestrian guidelines, bike and pedestrian guidelines, not general guidelines are more autom.

So, do committee members have additional thoughts? Okay. Okay. If there are no additional thoughts, I will um we're just taking feedback. So, I will move on to the next item, which is 5.2 uh State Route 237 and Middlefield Road Change improvements. This is project 65. Uh the staff presentation will be presented by Joy Hton, senior civil engineer and Robert Gonzalez, principal engineer. I don't need this Santa, she's already plugged in. So, I'm just gonna go first. You're going to try to steal my

Sorry about that.

You need to update photos.

We like the little ones. I know it's not show

on your screen.

Well, you got to start explaining each one.

I have two kids and so I'm my youngest one just turned. The other one will be 11 soon. Okay, let's do this now. active participants in the city's summer summer program. I can't Yes. Can we take a break?

Can we take a break for five minutes and then

let's take a break. I just want to be sure. Okay. So, sorry to those of you who are uh listening virtually or listening online. Um we are now back uh to F 5.2 which is State Route 237 and Middlefield Road interchange Improvements project 1965. Uh, and we're ready for the staff presentation.

Good evening, chair and committee members. My name is Joy H, senior civil engineer. I'm joined here by Robert Gonzalez, principal civil engineer. Um, and we're here to present updates and staff recommendation on the state route 237 and Middle Road interchange budget. Sorry to start with a little bit of background. Middlefield road between Log Avenue and the eastbound 237 offramp is very challenging due to the number and close proximity of signalized intersections in a relatively short um stretch of road. This results in a high collision rate and challenging environment for pedestrians and bicyclists. The intent of the project is to reduce collision conflicts and improve pedestrian and bicycle mobility and connectivity. This project has been in the works for close to two decades. Starting in 2005 when the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority or BTA solicited city support regarding highway projects in the Valley Transportation Plan or BTP 2023, which includes the State Route 237 and Middlefield Road Interchange. In 2006, the city entered into a co-op agreement to fund a project study report which included the state route 237 and field road interchange. In 2012, this project study report was completed and was approved by CALR in 2013. Up until this date, the project was theoretical without available funding for the subsequent phases. In 2018, city council accepted 11 million in community benefit funds from a development project at 700 metal field. The project entered the development phase when funding became available starting in 2019 when city council approved the capital project, the state route 237 and middlefield road interchange improvements project and appropriated 5.5 million of the community benefit funds received from the first phase of the development project and authorized execution of a funding agreement with VTA for project management services for the project approval and environmental document. and final design phases of the project. In 2020, the project was initiated and preliminary alternatives were developed. And since project initiation in late 2020, the project team has been in coordination with Calrans. Since the project impacts the rightway and operations to gain approval prior to starting the final design. Just at the stage, Middlefield Road is a four-lane roadway with four signal lines intersection approximately 300 ft apart in the project area between Log Avenue and the eastbound 237 offramp which contributes to a high rate of broadside collisions. In particular, the collision rate at the westbound 237 Middlefield Road frontage road intersection exceeds the statewide average for intersections of this type. The 237 Middlefield Road intersection operates as the partial interchange since they only have an eastbound off-ramp and a westbound um on-ramp compared to a full interchange with on and off ramps in both directions. Um, and with the other interchange movements happening at the Ma Avenue commercial interchange, there are continuous bike lanes, class 2 bike lanes, and four to six foot wide sidewalks on both sides of Middlefield Road within the project limit and east of Middlefield Road sidewalks and class 2 bike lanes do exist along the north and south sides of the westbound and eastbound frontage roads respectively. The project area is significantly constrained for bicyclists and pedestrian with Cal Train corridor acting as a north south barrier while 237 access. In 2012, traffic operations analysis was prepared to support the 2013 project study report. The analysis identified two locations that eastbound and westbound 237 experiencing collision rates higher than the statewide average collision.

You I just trying to get the logistics.

So Middlefield Road is actually left right on the page and then the 237.

So that's 237 is southbound.

Say that again. um westbound east middlefield is left to right on the page.

So they're left to right

and then the frontage road is at the

top and then the on ramp is

westbound on the 237.

Yes. So the north side

I look at 237 going north sidefield going east west.

So if you can go back one slide I think that'll help. Yeah.

Go back one more slide.

It's not there.

There it is.

It says location.

That's the west. Okay. So they're coming from

Okay.

And the next slide we we turn it on.

Turned it.

Yeah, that's why it was confusing. That that middle field is going left to right in the next slide. And then that apprentice road on ramp is going up and down. That's the slide.

Different orientation. We turned it 90 degrees to the left.

Challenge.

Go ahead and advance.

Keep awake. Okay. We are

um the

um so the collision data showed that approximately 75% of collisions in the study area occurred at the middlefield road and the 237 ramps, specifically the southbound traffic on Middlefield, um which includes three types of conflicting movements, southbound through and westbound 237 ramp through movements, southbound through and westbound 237 left turning traffic movements and southbound through and northbound left turning traffic movements. As the project began in 2020, the project intersections were also analyzed for key performance metrics including level of service or LOS instead of vehicle miles traveled. The level of service measures the quality of traffic flow and the driver's experience on the road and at intersections based on the speed and number of cars using the road. The LOS of a road is designated by a letter grade of A for free flow and to F for most congested conditions. on Middlefield Road. All intersections within the project area currently operate at the level services or better during both AM and PM peak hours. And this is according to the analysis conducted for the medical field group traffic operation study completed in 2025. An LOS fee indicates there's stable flow and operations is um and operates with a very average delay which is within the city's threshold of acceptable LOS. The project objectives and goals include reducing the frequency and severity of collisions along middlefield road within the project limits, improving pedestrian and bicycle accommodations and access, enhancing accessibility and connectivity to transit, strengthening connections to local roadways and plan developments in the area and optimizing the use of existing rightway. In 2020, the project team completed the preliminary investigative phase of the project to support the development and analysis of six on step alternatives, including two from the original project study report that will meet the project purpose and need. The project team developed six alternatives which I will be sharing on the next few slides and staff is presenting the project to the CTC first as we are seeking policy level direction on the approach of selecting the preferred alternative based on available funding for the project. The alternatives were scored um based on categories including bike and pet improvements, safety, environmental traffic operations, rightway and geometrics. The criteria um categories were weighed based upon their alignment with the project purpose and need and were ranked in the following order. Starting with the lowest ranking alternatives, alternative 5C, alternative 5B and alternative 2. These alternatives include new points of access to the state route 237 which was not supported by CALR as the highway safety analysis um predicted higher crash frequencies at the mainline connections. Calr had known new mainline connections to WPA. Alternative one ranked the highest but was not approved by CALR as it also introduces a new point of access to state route 237. With alternative one eliminated by CALR, the project team refined um the second and third highest ranking alternatives, alternatives three and four for Calrans review. In 2023, CALR expressed support for advancing these two alternatives for further consideration. In 2024, the project team um developed preliminary design concepts for alternatives three and four to further evaluate their feasibility due to the rightway acquisition requirements associated with alternative 4. Alternative 3 was subsequently refined to include improvements along frontage road, including traffic calming measures to reduce vehicle speeds approaching Middlefield Road. The additions of um the additions of improvements along the westbound frontage road increase the project costs from the previous cost estimate in 2020 but are still within the project budget. The conceptual design for the refined and the staff recommended alternative three includes the following proposed improvements. installation of traffic calming features along the westbound frontage road including race medians, pavement markings, radar feedback signs, landscaping and narrow travel. Also includes construction of class 4 bikeways and widened sidewalks along the westbound frontage road between Middlefield Road and Ma Avenue. installation of class 4 bikeways and six foot wide sidewalks on Middlefield Road and protected intersection improvements at Ferguson westbound 237 um ramp on ramp and the eastbound 237 offramp intersection. In addition, alternative 3 also includes technology improvements at intersections, including signal interconnect and signal timing optimization and modified traffic signal operations with separate bicycle and pedestrian signal phases. With the completion of the final draft of the biodiversity and urban forest plan, the project team will look for opportunities for inclusion of landscaping and green storm water infrastructure as we progress in the project and continue into the final design. The project is currently in the project approval and environmental document phase which is anticipated to be completed by the end of 2026. This phase will be followed by the final design phase expected to sorry expected to begin in 2027 and conclude in summer 2028 which will be followed by a 2-year construction period. The project cost estimate for the staff recommended um alternative is 24.8 million as summarized on the screen. The project is fully funded through the final design utilizing TA measure B highway um program fund. This combined with the city fund is sufficient to support construction of the project. As our next steps, staff will provide the BPAC with anformational update on June 24, 2026, including a summary of feedback received and policy level direction received from the CTC. Following evaluation of CTC feedback, staff will forward the recommendation to city council for approval of the design concept in fall 2026. This brings us to the staff recommendation for the CTC to receive an update and recommend that the city council approve the staff recommended design concept for the state route 237 and Middlefield Road interchange improvements project and this concludes our presentation and be happy to answer questions. Thank you.

Thank you. So, do committee members have questions? started raising your hand.

Yeah. Why are you rushing us through this broad? So, yeah. Okay. The the question that you kept referencing to collisions. How many collisions? And you said it exceeded the collisions total. So, how many collisions were there?

I'm sorry.

You kept referring to this was a high collision area. So, how many collisions were there? uh while joy looks for that through part of the traffic analysis there were identified as 87 near miss events. So that was identical analysis. Was there a particular spot that or was it just the or the near misses?

Yeah. Was it all just the one general area?

Well, so from the project area goes from LO and it covers three three those three intersections. The 237 westbound middlefield intersection. So they had intersection there where 87

I think the report said 87% were within the just that okay because I saw something when you mentioned McFergus ago. So, okay. And so, that was the only I was just curious how many there were. And

so, when we approached the project, it needs to be looked at as a complex um as a set of intersections because that's how Cal Translate looks at it. So, we know that if it were a city project and a city intersection, we might just be looking at one intersection, but these all work together. It's really system we need to be. So the project footprint grows a little bit. Um but 87% issues really are really and our solutions are really focused on that on that conversation.

87 percentages are tough but I do remember when we were working too.

Yes,

you were.

I was not but I know that intersection I drive through there.

That was also okay. No more questions.

Council member, can I do you have questions?

Yeah, I mean I think so. Um, so I guess just trying to find a way. So Alan is the the option for basically trans just agree the funding. option for alternative four. Um it's that was not it was alternative one that trans did not support.

Um we and we are recommending alternative three because that's within our reach um to be able to support through construction. If we go with alternative four, it does require um right away and we just don't have the funds to be able to move that forward to construction at this time. what aside from the funding issue and I was like I was trying to understand how might do we feel that going with option three will be able to withstand the amount of change that's going to be coming to that area. So, for example, council a few months ago adopted a 600 plus unit apartment complex go on the corner of Middlefield. And when I think about the frontage and the alignment with Ferguson Drive and what may or may not happen in the Middlefield Park area as well as the project we adopted at Ellis and Middlefield, we're just going to see a really high increase, I think, in bicycle and pedestrians, more so than we do now. And I live in that area, so I I see it firsthand. But so I'm just, you know, I'm comfortable with the staff recommendation, but I'm curious if staff feels like in

sure

a decade we're going to be needing to go for something like option four or sorry alternative four just because of the high volume and as and I think even at the we've discussed how it's very difficult to narrow middle field because of the high volume that Middlefield has. So, I just it's difficult to future proof a project, but just seeing where we're going and knowing the cost of the increase of cost if we don't tackle with the, you know, 2026 pricing. So I'm just curious if we feel like alternative three is just going to be the bandaid for alternate for the future where

so senior engineer help mentioned a traffic operations analysis that was done uh there was one done in 2012 there was another one done in 2025 and the one was that was done in 2025 several analyses were performed on that so existing conditions was one baseline but the about the work evaluation that was done was incorporating all of the planned uh known planned developments in the area that affect. So we kind of loaded up that those known future conditions including the one on low

that front and low. So we know the traffic volumes because that will now be a fourleg intersection at low

um with the the new development coming in as the fourth one. Uh, so I believe if I'm not mistaken that all of those all those traffic counts were accounted for in this analysis. So it didn't look like there was substantial degradation um from that from that development from from the known from the known developments that were loaded. Am I saying that correctly?

Um I believe so. But there's also no difference in capacity between alternatives three and alternatives four. both alternative project purpose and need. Um it's just that alternative three would give us the most bang for our buck.

Thank you helping with that. That's where I was trying to go.

Okay. Well, great. That was that was the first that was half of my question. I can now ask a smaller question.

Okay. Um so yeah again with the development around there particularly I don't remember the the Prometheus project I don't remember the the names of all the projects but um how so how does that interface with how does this interface with the like you talked about wide sidewalks with the uh with the improvements near the streetscape that the developer the developer was going to do.

Which one?

This is the the middle fieldment front to both streets.

The west corner of the project area.

Yeah. So we would expect the project status here is that we are in the preliminary phase of the project. So we are at the project selection phase. From here we move into design. So, we are really um I'm sad to say this, Council Mallister, but we are not at near the finish line yet. We are we are we will be kicking off the design for this project. If council approves it, we can move forward VTA as um so we would expect that the development is going to be an existing condition. I think that that's going to move advance forward sooner. Um so, we would be as we go into design, we would be providing that back that information as a background condition for the designers. they would see the improvements that we're showing here. We could actually have the developer um deliver some of those so they would be in place such as the sidewalk on that front that development.

Okay. So, let me see if I understand the sequence. Seems like a complicated sequence of events to make uh because there's so many moving projects at the same time. So tonight we'll point to a particular option and it'll go on to council and then you'll go through design which will include interfacing with the developer and I imagine whoever you expect them to go forward quicker than this particular project. But if it doesn't, they'll be contact to make sure you're not like and ripping them out. Okay, that sounds good. Um, and then also like the uh the picture. So my question was going to be about traffic volume and traffic in the area, but you kind of asked that. So now I'm narrowing it down just to the sidewalk. It seems like this is an area we want to make it much more in addition to much safer for for cars and and bikers, we also want more people be walking and it is a barrier that area right now. So, how does this connect to the rest of the the middlefield improvement project that we talked about and then also individual developments? Like, can we expect between those two things and then this project to see dramatic improvements that'll make everybody really want to walk a bike through this area and drive their electric cars? Right there.

Yeah. Go ahead.

Um for for the existing pedestrian infrastructure in this area, it's uh four to six and we want to make that we want to make six foot kind of the the minimum in this area at least within the project area on Middlefield Road. Um and then also widen the existing sidewalk

um and include a bike lane on the north side of the west frontage road.

Yeah. I mean that sounds appropriate to me.

We do want to improve the pedestrian facility and not just maintain the exist.

Are you going to be able to add tree canopy?

That is something that we will be exploring as we progress final design.

Okay. I'm getting more of a picture of how the sequence is. Thank you. And

can I have um principal engineer speak to the field question?

Yes. Um so both answer your question about the

Yes.

Yeah. So both projects are programming class 4 protected bike lanes. So that gives some separation between vehicle traffic and bike traffic. So as if if you are traveling downfield after both these projects are complete, you will have a much more comfortable ride going say from um shoreline all the way down to parts of sunny. So all the way down to Bernard through this through this

and then this included some lane narrowing. Uh I think if I remember reading

we are considering lane reduction or lane width reduction on westbound frontage road. Um we

plan to be consistent with the lanes the lane width proposed as part of the middlefield complete streets which is currently 11 um feet wide

and frontage is wider.

It's wider and we propose to make them 11 ft as well. The challenge here is that most of the middlefield road within the project area as well as the frontage road those are all operated by Calrance. So Calr would have to approve um the the final dimensions proposed for the lane

and council member Mallister you had an additional question.

Yeah. Okay. I'm trying to what problem okay you're what's the problem you're trying to resolve number of crashes and if it's the number of crashes shouldn't cal so the issue is with the signalized the three signalized or four signalized intersections within close proximity does result in a higher collision rate higher than statewide average and to answer your question earlier it is in the memo it just wasn't in the table format at um but between 2005 and 2010 there were 26 total collisions between um just at the intersections of the on and off ramps on Metalfield and then between 2011 and 2015 that went up to 31. Um between 2016 and 2020 that went up to 44. Um the city saw an opportunity when we received the community benefit funds. um those funds usually typically get um used on improvements within the area and this was kind of the bigger project that we could tackle um of course with coordination and collaboration with Cal Trans.

So and it also adds your question related to like why isn't Calrans delivering these projects. So, um I I'm I'm very proud to say that Mountain View is more proactive in delivering uh transportation improvements on a faster scale, more efficient than Calrans. While Calrans does do this, um they have a a enormous network to maintain. You know, respectively, I understand that we have a a smaller network to maintain and we're very proactive in applying these PE bodments throughout the city. So we saw an opportunity here as we did we do with other projects we're doing within Mountain View such as the recently completed real wet lanes the El Monte intersection um improvements that we alino pestro protected intersection improvements so there's a lot of projects that we are implementing because it's a priority for our community um and we can deliver faster than

oh so the initial thing with the community benefits was get the bike lanes and that also that was our main goal at the time was bike. Okay, that's what I thought. And so Calrant said, "Well, while you're at it, do this for us." Make sense?

The original objective also was to reduce the collision because that was known from the 2012 2013 project study report that was completed also in coordination with Calrans at BTA. Having the interchange um included in that project study report means that CALR commits staff to work with us and VTA to deliver this project without costs to the city or the project.

So what actually is changing on the the intersection?

There are some protected uh intersection treatments that is that's proposed at the Ferguson the on and off ramps. Um, so that would help reduce the vehicle speed as well as make the turning movements more predictable at the intersections, which then could result in a lower uh potential collision or lower conflicting movements in the area because now we're combining improvements along Middlefield Road and Frontage Road really to target the intersection that has the most conflict. I'd also add that um the frontage road uh senior engineer Hton pointed out a couple of medians that we're proposing along that frontage road. Uh this is new so they're not there today and that's also in an effort to reduce speeds, create an element that would narrow the lane uh and another element that could help visual indicator that this is a little different. Um I need to slow down to be able to navigate this. Okay. I'm going with your record based. I was just curious. I'm all for what you're doing.

Sure. The the

and I was just curious of what exactly is occurring.

Yeah. The the report also outlines installation of reflective backlights, installation of uh near side signal heads, mod modified traffic signal operations um to provide a bike and ped signal signal phases. So dedicated phases for bikes and pads. All of these support the two biggest factors, the collision factors for speeding and red light run. All of these kind of fall in line as modifications that you could do really kind of uh lowcost modifications to change driver behavior.

Were any collisions including bicyclists or was it just car?

These are people because I know models. Now that's confusing to me. When you turn on a green light, is your lane or somebody else? But that's that's

okay. Last call for questions. Okay, we will move on to public comment. Would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person like to provide comment on this item?

Yes, it's Barry Burr from 325 Walker Drive. really the issue of Middlefield Road risks of this undefined uh approval of a class for bike lane right in my backyard, a place I bike and drive through sometimes commute to work or elsewhere. Really kind of woke up a sleeping dog. Some of you remember me from 15 to 20 years ago on the BPAC or my most recent civic engagement was on the mountain police citizen cohort group uh two or three year three years ago. But relevant to here was that this middle middle field and 237 interchange was major topic that the police traffic officers that spoke with us have brought up that they had been working on light timing. This was a known high collision area and that when they got done with a lot of the light timing and adjustments, they felt that they already had dialed back from a lot of the additional collisions. The primary cause of majority of the collisions is cars coming down the ramp off of 237, I'll call it southbound with third Mus where they're coming down in the 60s, 70s or 80s miles per hour within a quarter mile or less needing to slow down sometimes to a stop. Well, a few rumble strips across or bots dots, that's a standard way of slowing cars down in transition. I'm not seeing that mentioned or hearing that brought up, but if you can amend in to have a few rows of bots dots and rumble strips coming down that ramp, I venture a guess that uh closing speeds by the time they get to the light could be 10 to 20 miles an hour slower just from all the traffic needing to go over that. So that's when rumble strips. Now there with the class 4 bike lane um proposals being so vague, Calrans and I think BTA2 has a wide range of options how to design them, how to implement them. They show many pictures for many areas around the state which widely range in what's done including the reflectivity or lack or not using reflectivity. Um, one example I'd offer is Europa down in San Jose where there's no filler. It's just round holes, somewhat vertical round green tubes. Cars and bicycles all see each other really well coming in and out. Now, precedent for the city to hold back on not moving forward until the class 4 definition is further defined goes back to 2006, seven, eight, nine, 10, and 11. the six years it took me along with VTA and the VPAC's involvement to get the striping of bike lane ingress and ingress on the overpass from shoreline over 101. Eventually, CALR and VTA approved the Safeway and they refined it and then they moved forward with the next city striping contract. I'm just about out of time. That's pretty much what I have here. Um you can contact me personally privately in the email if you

thank you very much.

Are there any virtual speakers?

Yes, April Webster.

Hi um April Webster. I'm vice chair of the D4 CALR uh back and also on the um California walk bike technical advisory committee. So I see a lot of this projects and what CALR is doing. I'm speaking of my own on my own capacity. Um interchanges I like intersections are among the most dangerous and high stress locations for people walking and biking. They combine high speeds, turning and merging movements, long crossings, driver expectations shaped by freeway conditions, etc. They also separate communities for people in cars. It can feel like a connection for people walking, biking, or taking transit. It feels like a wall um or like a place you have to survive passing through. It's especially important here um on 237 because it's a Cal Train corridor. The Middlefield light rail station is right there. Um Wisman Station, LinkedIn um is right at this nearby employer. Other nearby employers um they all shape how people move or can't move through this area. I would like to ask staff to evaluate this design from the perspective of an interested but concerned bicyclist, including children, family, older adults, people who don't feel confident riding next to freeway ramps, which probably a lot of us. Um, riding alongside something like this, um, even like a highway on-ramp, I'm not sure if any of you have done it. I have, it takes nerves as steel. If the design only works for these confident adult cyclists, then it's not going to be an all ages and ability facility. Um, I would like staff to clarify whether the proposed bike way um has been evaluated against CALR District 4 current bicycle best practices. This just came out in the past couple years. They have information in there for interchange crossings um etc. I would also like um you know all the parties to think about future proofing this um and trips that people want to make over the next several day um decades. That means evaluating it um the most protective form of class 4 facility feasible including raised um or sidewalk level bikeways are appropriate. San Jose um King Road complete streets project is doing this. Um they just presented at the VTA BPAC um for an OBG for um funding. It was an excellent project. Um I would highly recommend you look at that. Um I don't think flex posts or modular curb linear treatments will be sufficient here especially this kind of environment. um they could be interim but they're not great. Um finally, VTA is beginning an interchange research right now um funded by Calrans. They're still in the data and background phase. Um but because this project is in PA and DD before it enters into PSN final design, I think this is the time to keep that design window open and coordinate with BTA's research and also CALR best district for best practices. Um this is being presented tomorrow morning at the BPAC at 10:00 to 12. I encourage you, it's open to the public. I encourage you to attend. I'm happy to share details about that meeting. Thanks.

Thank you. Are there more speakers?

No, that's all.

Okay. Thank you very much. So, we will now uh bring this back to the committee for comments and action. I'll make

Are there any comments before we

are your comments?

I apologize. I didn't read the staff report. I didn't know I I was concentrating so much on this. I go that's the whole meeting and so I apologize. I did not That's why I asked some quick. I apologize for so much. I'll trust in staff on this. We're going to get it done. Okay. Well, I will I will make my comment. Do you have any comments? I'm just excited that we're here 20 years later. This area really needs improvement. So, thank you for that for your persistence and also creativity in terms of all the different alternatives you looked at. And then I think what council member or committee member like is that you know it would be fully funded and we could get that. you know, but I added, you know, I just, you guys ever gone through Carson City? If you go through Carson City, they do a lot of the freeways have

any that can be incorporated in the underpass, I think.

Actually, actually, I have to second that. That would be this is such a barrier in this neighborhood. This is not for now but but anything so my comment is just you know what the public speaker said anything since we're at such an initial phase and this is such a barrier in this area and it's going to develop so much and it has been a place where people just drove to the office and then drove away and stayed inside their offices and we're trying to transform it into something else. you know, anything you can do along those lines or what the public speaker said about coordinating with BTA research. Just anything you can do to turn it into more of a real neighborhood where people be outside

even downtown San like the trains. Yeah, the trains have like a train going through part of it.

I know we have an unlimited budget for that. Yeah. you know, hey, this could be

this is out of our public art.

Well, let's call.

Okay.

But no, that's

So, I'm not going to say no.

Okay.

We will look into it

later. So, for later.

Yeah.

Okay. Are we ready to take the vote?

I'm hearing no more comments. I think we're ready. Um, so we'll member Mallister and second. Um, committee member May.

Yes.

Member Mallister.

Yes.

Chair Hicks.

Yes.

Passes three.

Okay. We are now on item number six which is committee staff announcements, updates, requests, and committee reports. Uh 6.1 is committee comment. Do any of the committee members have comments or reports to share? Taking that

trouble.

Okay. Um okay. So now uh would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person like to provide comments on this item? If so, please there have been items. So um are there any public comments on our lack of comments? Um in that case uh thank you. We're now on item number seven which is adjournment. Our next uh CTC meeting will be August 31st uh 2026 and we will adjourn at 9:20 p.m. Thank you.