City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening. Like to call to order the regular meeting of the Campbell City Council for Tuesday, February 3rd, 2026. And we'll start with roll call, please. Council member Lopez, here. Council member Hines, present. Council member Bby, present. Vice Mayor Scazola, here. Mayor Fat

here. I would like to uh now move to the pledge of allegiance and I'd like to invite Leslie Fabila uh from our public works department to lead the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God indivisibley and justice for all. Ladies and gentlemen, uh it's my pleasure on behalf of the city council to recognize Leslie Faba, um a longtime city employee who was recently appointed as executive assistant to the director of public works and department of engineering. Uh Leslie, as I mentioned, has been with the city for a long time. She has worked in the city manager's office in our recreation and community services office. She's worked in the finance department and uh now for some time she's been working in public works and uh she's I think always the first person on duty in the entire city in the morning and uh it's always she always has a smile on her face and uh is willing to greet everyone. But besides that, her work is ex exceptionally efficient, does a very nice job for the city, and it's our pleasure on your promotion to recognize you and to thank

you uh for what you do for us. I'd like to present this little certificate sort of as a momento of leading the pledge for us. Very nice. Thank you so much. You're welcome. I don't like to take a picture here. So, Thank you. Thanks, Leslie. Thank you.

Congratulations. We have no special presentations and proclamations. We have no communications or petitions. And so we now come to the point in the agenda under oral requests. This would be the time for anyone in the audience or anyone online to address the council on any item not on tonight's agenda. So I would I do have some requests. And let's check here. So I'd like to first uh invite Chris Gian Greco to speak to us. There you go.

Okay. I'd like to talk to you folks about something that I witnessed at the Garrett last night. Uh I was eating pizza with a family member when another family came in. There was a gentleman at the bar that was drinking or whatever was going on. And the couple that sat next to me, it was a mother with a uh 18 year old, 19 year old son. They came in to have dinner. And the one gentleman was learing, for a lack of a better way of putting it, learing at this young lady. She was quite attractive. I've got to admit that. But uh there was learing going on to the degree that the the object of this man's attention basically said in front of the whole bar, "Hey, knock it off. Stop it." and it kind of stopped, but it did continue. And uh it wound up being kind of a a a running joke after the bar. And after this gentleman left, another bar patron came up and showed a photo of what certainly appeared to be your vice mayor. Okay? And I'm not laying accusations directly on him, but this photo appeared to be your vice mayor uh doing this. So this raises the question, what's acceptable behavior to the city council of your council members as a public elected official? This was not a good scene and I witnessed the whole thing and I tried to persuade the object of that person's attention to come and you know so I'll leave it in your hands to figure out was this the actions of your vice mayor? What are you going to do about it? This type of behavior should not happen in your most popular pizza parlor just this close to downtown. So, you know, I felt it was my civic

obligation to let you guys know what went on. And there you have it. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd now like to invite um Laura Reese to speak to us.

Hi, thanks for having me. Um, I live at 1159 Futrell Drive and I'm here um this morning Mountain View uh took down their flock cameras because they discovered that federal agencies had accessed their data when they thought they had blocked the federal agencies. A Texas sheriff searched the footage of 83,000 flock cameras to track a woman seeking an abortion. A Flock camera was found to be live streaming children at a playground. And this weekend, I searched the Flock audit database for Campbell searches and discovered out of 13,000 searches, roughly half had no justification. This raises questions about probable cause, whether it was established, and red flags about whether our Fourth Amendment constitutional protection against unreasonable search was violated. Flock cameras vulnerabilities are many. Our privacy when they are operational is compromised. I ask the city council, if you haven't already, uh, shut down any flock cameras we have. um bring all the data from the cloud to self-hosted private databases, purge data that's older than 30 days per our policy on the website, and establish a technology oversight committee that evaluates technology for constitutional compliance before deployment, not after. Say what you will about the federal government, but I personally have lost confidence in their willingness and ability to protect our constitutional rights. So now it's on us. Campbell has an opportunity to show how a community can come together and protect constitutional rights with the same

fierce dedication we apply to public safety. We could be this shining city on the hill shining a beacon for safety and and freedom. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. I I'll sit down.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Appreciate the opportunity. Obviously, uh we've seen a lot in the news uh recently and uh concerns related to flock have uh have been happening throughout the country and we have been a customer of flock for a number of years. Um I guess my my brief comments will say that uh as we became aware of some of the other concerns throughout the country we conducted several audits of our own system confirmed that none of our um sharing options are on. So, we are not sharing outside the state of California, which is prohibited by law. We are not sharing with any federal agencies, which is prohibited by law. And according to California Senate Bill 54, we're not allowed to participate in any immigration uh enforcement activities, uh, which we are not doing. Um, in regards to Flock itself, as the council is, uh, most likely remembers, we are in the process of, uh, of of getting rid of the contract. We've already eliminated one of our contracts with Flock and we are uh moving to our own database public safety uh camera system outside of the Flock network. We see huge benefits to public safety when it comes to uh ALPR data. Um, but as the speaker noted, that requires uh oversight, appropriate policies and uh and usage. And I can uh tell the council that uh based on our policies and our oversight, I feel very confident in uh in the ways that our ALPR data is is being used. Um but we will continue moving away from flock and uh and capturing those uh those uh hits within our own system so that we have uh complete control over that data. appreciate those comments.

I would now like to invite Susan.

Good evening, council and honorable mayor. I'm here to uh tell you about my game board launch party on Saturday. Uh you guys are all invited to come. It's a 10y year journey. I had been on I took a hiatus while I was on council and spent this last year getting to production. Uh I want to sell the first box in downtown Campbell, which will be this Saturday at 3:00. Please come. The chamber is going to do a ribbon cutting and I hope our mayor will still be coming and help everybody else. Um and then at four o'clock, we're going across the street to Campbell uh the coffee roasting to actually play. So, I'm just here to invite everybody and thank you guys.

Thank you, Susan. I might ask the city clerk if we have anyone else online that would want to address us. Does anyone else in the audience wish to address the council on any item not on the agenda? Seeing none,

the requests and move on to item number six, council announcements. I do have several announcements. I do have several announcements if you'll bear with me. Um, this year marks the 100th anniversary of Black History Month. The 2026 national theme, quote, a century of black history commemorations, quote, honors a century of recognizing the profound contributions of black Americans and the contributions they've made to our nation. Through leadership, creativity, storytelling, uh, and collective care, black communities have shaped our culture, strengthened our democracy, and inspired generations. This centennial year is an opportunity to reflect, learn, honor, and contribute um and continue that commitment to enrich our city and our country. The second announcement is that for 134 years, Campbell heritage and early settller's day have been cherished uh as a special commemoration here in the city of Campbell. Um, our tradition is now that we are recognized as the longest running public celebration in the state of California. The event u for us on President's Day uh honors camel history and its early pioneers. The 2026 celebration will take place at the Orchard City Banquet Hall on Monday, February 16th from 11 to 2. Our guest speaker will be Carrie Perkins uh who is the supervisor of the Campbell Historical Museum and she'll share some historic stories about uh Campbell's Water Tower. The water tower mascot, quote, "The dude will make a special appearance at this event. And for more information, please visit the uh Campbell Chamber of Commerce website, which is campbellchamber.net."

The third announcement is that the Santa Clair County Superior Court is seeking applications for the 2627 civil grand jury. This independent oversight body plays a fi vital role in promoting transparency and accountability in local government civil grand jurors uh matters. And the grand jury does investigate public agencies, um, reviews resident complaints, and issues reports with recommendations to improve government operations. Those interested can find full details, including the link to an online application, if you're so interested, at Santa Clara.ca.govj. You may also contact our own city clerk's office at uh clerk's office at campellca.gov for additional information. Uh applications for the civil grand jury will be accepted through fe f pardon me Friday March 27th. The next announcement is the city is offering grant funding through the neighborhood um association assistance grant program. It's a program we've had in effect for some time. Campbell neighborhood associations are encouraged to apply and applications are opened uh through Monday, February 23rd. So you can visit the city's website at campca.gov. The next announcement has to do with the fact that uh we invite you to discover uh the Campbell preschool program is a very warm, welcoming, engaging place for young learners. Families are invited to an open house on Saturday, March 7th from 10:00 in the morning till noon uh to meet our dedicated teachers, explore the classrooms uh and experience nurturing um and play-based environment firsthand.

Also, on March 7th, the recreation department will host a summer camp and swim lesson open house. That will be from 11 in the morning until 1 in the afternoon. um stop by to learn about the city's summer camp, meet the instructors, and learn all about um how this will occur over the summer. Families can also take advantage of free swim assessments to ensure children are placed in the appropriate swimming level. All activities are free and open to the public. Once again, please uh contact our recreation department and you could do so online at campbellca.gov/recreation. And finally, the uh AARP Foundation is offering free income tax assistance through April the 14th in room C34 at the Campbell Community Center. This service allows low to moderate income adults and families 18 and years old and older um to receive this assistance. Um details are available once again on the city's website. So these are the city uh mayor's announcements for this week. We now move to the consent calendar. Um these are items 7.1 to 7.9 which the council will take as a single item of business unless a member of the public uh a member of the staff or members of the city council would like to pull an item for individual discussions. Does anyone wish to pull an item?

I'd like to pull uh 7.6. 7.6. six and it looks like I I'm sorry. Uh yeah, go ahead. I also would like to pull item 7.9 from tonight's consent calendar. So with those two exceptions, may I have a motion to approve the consent calendar? I'll move the consent calendar with the exceptions of 7.6 and 7.9.

I'll second. We would need a roll call vote, please. Does this include the desk item 7.1? Yes. Thank you, Council Member Lopez. Hi, Council Member Hines. Hi, Council Member Vivey. Hi, Vice Mayor Skazola. Hi, Mayor Fado. Hi, we'll move right now then to uh consent calendar item number 7.6, the investment report for the quarter ending December 2025.

I just wanted to make a comment on there that the finance department has just done a tremendous job highlighting and the transparency um there. This particular one shows the measure K funds are being collected and are being uh put into the measure K tax escrow deposit. I get a number of questions on that and so and that which is managed by Campbell. I just wanted to acknowledge that for the constituents to know that that is being collected and where it's being managed and thank them. With that, I'll move to uh uh accept 7.6 investment report quarter ending December 2025. Thank you. Do we have a second? I'll second.

Motion and a second uh to approve item 7.6. Um roll call, please. Council member Lopez. Hi. Council member Hines. Hi. Council member Bby. Hi. Vice Mayor Skazola. Hi. Mayor Fado. Hi. We now move to item 7.9. This is to accept a donation of $4,000 from the Water Tower Kitchen for the Campbell Recreation Youth Scholarship Fund. Uh, and to approve the associated budget adjustment. And the reason why I've asked that this be pulled is because I believe um the representatives from the water tower kitchen are here would like to make a presentation. So um please uh come forward uh to our microphone.

Should we say something here? If you'd like. Um, thanks for having us. We take a lot of pride in supporting the community. A big part of the community is youth sports. From the kids to the coaches to the parents. Um, we really love giving back and, um, just being a part of Campbell and, you know, helping people and, you know, feeding people too. Thanks a lot, guys. Appreciate it. Thank you very much for this donation. We appreciate it. And, uh, representing our Department of Recreation uh, is here. She will accept the uh donation on our behalf.

Thanks guys. You have a certificate.

Yes, I do. Before you um leave sorry we have a certificate of appreciation for your donation city and our youth programs which I think are excellent programs and so it's a well placed donation.

Thank you so much so much for coming tonight. And I just wanted to I just wanted to thank you as well from uh from my standpoint. Youth sports has been a big part of uh what I was involved in. So uh not here in Campbell, but as my kids were growing up. So I really appreciate it. And I also really appreciate that every time it's not televised, you show a Cub game and a Bear game. So thank you, Mayor. I'd also like to thank you as well. Um, one of the best parts of being in Campbell, living in Campbell, serving for Campbell are businesses such as yours that really support our community and understand um the value of community and and uh and working together. So, thank you very much.

And and likewise, before you you head out, uh I just want to show my appreciation. Uh you love Water Tower Kitchen going down and uh even better knowing how much you support the community. Really are part of the fabric. I did youth sports here growing up and so uh it's just a great feeling to know the next generation will have that support. So, thank you so much. Thanks very much. May we have a motion to accept item 7.9. I'll move the staff recommendation to accept the donation. Oh, second. Sorry. Did you catch that? Okay, we have a motion and accept and a second to accept the donation of $4,000. Uh, roll call, please.

Council member Lopez. Hi. Hi. Hi. Vice Mayor. I think the mic's off, but Scazola. Mayor Fittado. Hi.

Thank you. So, we now move to um item number eight, which are public hearings and introduction of ordinances. And we'll move first of all to item 8.1, the introduction of an ordinance amending the Campbell Municipal Code to clarify the timeline of council committee appointments. Um oh is here to make the presentation.

Thank you. Um good evening honorable mayor and members of the council. This is introduction of an ordinance as the mayor stated to amend section 2.0450 04050, which would essentially change the um mayor's authority to appoint council members to committees um from annually to at the beginning of the mayor's term and then anytime uh thereafter as deemed um necessary by the mayor. And with that, I'm happy to take any questions.

Any any questions for Angelie? Thank you. I might just add myself that um the current policy for appointing members of commissions and boards um the council policy allows that to rest with the mayor making the appointments. But there are times and but unfortunately the current ordinance only allows that to happen once a year at the beginning of the year. And the reality is that sometimes things happen, we have to make a substitute um or someone might be unavailable and the option is there to appoint another member of the council to represent rather than having to cancel the meeting. So um I would hope my colleagues would um vote in favor of this and allow this flexibilities. Any comments?

Oh, I think it makes sense. Would you like to make the motion? Do we need public comment first? Oh, yes. You're right. Does any member of the public wish to comment on this particular item? Seeing none, I'll close the public comment hearing and we'll move it back to the council. I'll I'll make a motion then that the council introduce and have hold first reading of an ordinance amending section 2.04.050 050 of the Campbell Municipal Code to amend when council committee appointments may occur. I'll second. Thank you. We have a motion and a second. Roll call, please. Council member Lopez.

Hi. Council member Hines. Hi. Council member Vivey. Hi. Vice Mayor Skazola. Hi. Mayor Fado. Hi. Thank you. The city clerk will read the uh title of the ordinance. An ordinance of the city council of the city of Campbell amending chapter 2.04 of the Campbell Municipal Code regarding council committee appointments. I will move further reading of the ordinance. I'll second. We have a motion and a second to weigh further reading of the ordinance. Uh roll call, please. Council member Lopez. Hi. Council member Hines. Hi. Council member Bby.

Hi. Vice Mayor Skazola. Hi. Mayor Fado. Hi. Thank you. We now move to item 8.2. This is a public hearing to consider the adoption of an ordinance to extend the interim ordinance number 2326 which which was established as an urgency measure to implement a temporary moratorum on the issue of tobacco retailer permits um at new city locations or within new city locations in the city of Campbell. and um Rob uh our community Rob Eastwood our community talent director will give the staff report.

Mayor Patado council members uh very quickly the Campbell does have a tobacco moratorum that was adopted last year. It expires on March 2nd of this year effectively presents new smoke shops from being established in the city. Uh staff is requesting uh the council consider adoption of this ordinance which would extend the moratorum for one more year. It allow time for staff to research on an acceptable permanent ordinance and allow staff uh more rebuilding of staff resources to repair that ordinance. Uh that's my presentation. I do have senior planner Steven Rose online. He and I are available if you have any questions.

Thank you very much. Does any member of the council have questions regarding this extension? Um, I will open the public hearing to allow members of the public to comment uh on this particular item. Does anyone wish to address the council on item 8.2? So, we have no one online. We don't. Okay. I'll close the public hearing and um what is the pleasure of the council? You're doing really well.

Okay. I will move that the city council adopt an ordinance extending interim or ordinance number 2326 which established urgency measures to implement a temporary moratorum on the issuance of taco tobacco retailer permits at new locations in the city. I I will second and I'll just once again thank staff um for the positive recognition this step has already received. Thank you. We have a motion and a second um in favor of adopting item 8.2. 2. Roll call, please. Council member Lopez. Hi. Council member Hines, hi. Council member Vivey, I. Vice Mayor Scazola, I. Mayor Fado, I.

Um, the city clerk will also read the title of this ordinance. Okay. Being an ordinance of the city council of the city of Campbell extending urgency measures to implement a temporary moratorum on the issuance of tobacco retailer permits at new locations in the city. File number PLN 20225-12. I'll move to wave further reading of the ordinance. I'll second motion and a second to wave further reading. Roll call once again, please. Council member Lopez. Hi. Council member Hines. Hi. Council member By. Hi. Vice Mayor Scazola. Hi. Mayor Fado. Hi.

Thank you. We now move to um new business and uh we have two items on tonight's agenda. 9.1 this is the acceptance of the final feasibility study for the Hamilton Avenue state route 17 uh bicycle overcrossing and um our director of public works Amy Olay will make the presentation. Welcome. Good evening. I'm Mayor and members of the city council. Let me just try to get my presentation to share with you. Sorry about this. Let me see if I can do the slideshow. That work. Okay, perfect. Sorry about that. Okay. So, this item um it's about the Hamilton Avenue State Route 17 bicycle overcrossing feasibility study. Um and I will we will go over the agenda which is the project background and goals. Before I do that, I do want to introduce that we have John Pashiotti from HMH Engineers who is here to present with me. And I want to also acknowledge

Matthew geot traffic engineer who is here as well. Um so as part of what we want to share with you is we want to talk about the public engagement process and then share the design alternatives evaluation and the conclusions and John will cover those parts and I will come back and talk about the next steps and then the staff recommendation. But before doing that, I do want to talk a little bit about the background and goals. Um, you know, as we all know that with this facility, it is very challenging for pedestrians walking across Hamilton um over State Route 17 and there are no bike facilities and so it makes it really hard as a east west bicycle network that kind of connection. And um so really with the purpose of the feasibility study, we set out our goals which is to make sure or to look at possibilities for an actual overcrossing and with the goals of looking at whether it's feasible, is it constructable, does it address um public concerns, does it would it be acceptable to Calrans who owns the right of way over this structure? Um and then also trying to get an understanding of the cost if we were to build such a facility. And so we were fortunate enough to be able to get a u funding grant from measure B bicycles and pedestrian planning studies to allow us to start the feasibility study. Um and with that we then um went through the request for proposal process where we wanted to select select a consultant and with that we selected HMH engineers to lead the design and as part of that team we also

have biggest Cardardoza a structural firm and a circle point an uh public engagement firm that helped through this entire process. So with that, I will turn it over to John to walk you through um the more details um of the designs and the alternatives and how we then came up with the selected alternatives and I'll come back and walk you through the next steps.

Thank you Amy and it's a pleasure to be here. Thank you for your time. So the uh the project is located at State Route 17 in Hamilton Avenue. And one of the things I'll note is Calrans is the underlying land owner. So everything we do here is going to need to ultimately be approved by CALR and follow their process. Um, but we extend from Salmar Avenue to the west to Creekide Way to the east, including crossing multiple highway ramps, State Route 17, and the VTA light rail and UP freight rail that runs along the south side of Hamilton Avenue. Uh the other uh project location there there's a significant east west movement for bicycles and pedestrians and what we're trying to do is is provide better access for residences that that live to the west uh to access the the creek trail uh the prunard shopping center Hamilton Plaza and a lot of the destinations uh we've seen that state route 17 can be a major barrier for active transportation users feeling comfortable getting across our city at this major arterial some existing conditions of the project site. There are no bicycle facilities within the project footprint. Sidewalks are narrow. They have some undulation on them that can create difficulty. We have observed cyclists that walk or ride their bikes on sidewalks because they feel unsafe on the roadway which uh further exacerbates the issues in these very very narrow areas. The image on the right is also an outdated approach to uh on-ramps. This is an uncontrolled crossing. Essentially, the only protection measure for pedestrians is a couple lines of paint on the ground. It can be very stressful and discourage users. So, these are some of the existing deficiencies that we're looking to address with the project. So, at the beginning of the project, we we went out with a blank slate to the community. We uh we did some tableabling at the fund run and Valentine's Day. We also launched an online survey where we had over 400 respondents from the

community. We saw a pretty good demographic as far as geographic reach, age group, etc. Uh, and it gave us a lot of confidence that we had a pretty good sampling of the community. We asked on the right, what does a successful project look like to you as we weigh the various uh pros and cons? What would you like to see in a project? And and overwhelmingly heard safety was the number one priority. Not really surprising. Uh other significant uh aspects that uh the community voiced was ease of use and physical separation from vehicles that that ability to feel like there's not a significant stress uh and and fear uh in using our facilities. On the flip side, uh scoring low on here was any potential impacts to private property were not particularly important to the community that was surveyed. Similarly, cost and environmental impact scored lower on the spectrum uh as the community weighed in on what they would like to see a successful project look like. We also reached out to some of the stakeholders. Uh so we did meet with the uh city of Campbell's bicycle and pedestrian advisory committee uh regular updates as well as a formal uh presentation in April uh and and secured their input and guidance on on what was proposed here. We also met with VTA. They own the light rail station uh immediately adjacent to the project area and they also oversee significant projects through the area. We wanted to make sure we were compatible with ongoing VTA projects and and had synergy between our improvements. We met with CALR. This is probably the single most important stakeholder for the project uh and heard their concerns. Calrans advocated for grade separated facilities. They like to see bicycles and pedestrians at a separate grade than cars for inherent benefits. It's it's safer. There's also less impact to traffic operations, but that comes at a cost. Uh Calrans also voiced concern over future flexibility of their state interstate system. Uh they want to be able to do what they want to do with

their land in the future. So, uh we weighed those those inputs in the proposed alternatives. And then finally with the city of San Jose, we engage the city to ensure if there are any other projects along Hamilton Avenue or Baskam as we understand to the north. Make sure that we're talking and that our projects are compatible and also ask for peer review and peer input on the recommended alternatives. Make sure if they've got other ideas that we were missing, we engage that expertise evaluation. So for the evaluation, we looked at six key areas. Uh user experience, is it stressful? Are are you significantly delayed? Uh is there a major hill that you have to climb that might discourage a bicycle from wanting to ride up and over or down and under uh some of these facilities. Impacts to traffic operations. We recognize how congested this interchange is in its existing condition. We wanted to be certain we weren't exacerbating those existing deficiencies. Environmental impacts. Visual. There's a significant trees in the area. We are considerate of design standards. Are we consistent with best practices both at the local and statewide level? Um cost, overall cost, maintenance cost, you know, what is what is the price of these improvements? And then finally, uh really alignment with the what we heard from the community. Are we aligned with what the input from the community was? Prioritizing safety, prioritizing physically separated facilities. There's a couple uh terminologies that I'll use through the remainder of this presentation. I just wanted to introduce bike lanes I think are are pretty conventional. They're on street not physically separated from vehicles. Uh they can be buffered with a a buffer stripe or not. Uh an undercrossing is that that central image you you see this is a recent example from a city of San Jose project that is a bicycle and pedestrian trail crossing under a freeway offramp. So when I use the term undercrossing, it would be a physical separated crossing under a freeway

facility. And similarly, overcrossing that image to the right is an example of a bicycle and pedestrian facility crossing over a freeway facility. So I'll use that terminology through the remainder of the presentation. There were four alternatives that were developed in partnership with the city, and I'll talk about each of these in a little bit of detail without trying to get too far into the weeds. The first alternative named the southern route uh essentially builds a shared class one facility. This is shared for bicycles and pedestrians. And it sweeps down and south off of Hamilton Avenue and then crosses over both on uh both the um state route 17 proper as well as the southbound diagonal onramp. And what you'll notice it avoids the the northbound loop on the right side of your screen. And so this alternative of the three that are discussed is the only alternative that physically separates all conflicts between bicycles and pedestrians with those on-ramps. In all of the alternatives I'm about to discuss or or three of the four, all of the on street treatments are the same. So I'll describe those in detail here and then I'll I'll simply refer back to them in the future. At Salmar Avenue on the west end of your pro of the the image here, we would have improvements for bicycles and pedestrians. uh increased signage, increased delineation, and then improved um uh curb ramps and curb alignments to facilitate ingress and egress into a new grade separated facility. The same treatment is proposed at Creek Side Way to the east, new green paint, new crosswalks, enhanced uh curb ramps at Creekide Way in the westbound direction. Uh in this alternative, we are also proposing adding an on street facility for bicyclists. There's existing sidewalks on the north side of Hamilton Avenue, but there are not existing bike lanes. And so with this alternative, we can also create space for those cyclists that choose to remain on Hamilton Avenue and may not want to go out of direction.

There's an enhanced facility for them there. Uh, in this alternative, we've got the profile down in the bottom right corner, but one thing I want to quickly note is the reason that it pulls so far away from Hamilton is because it can cross at roughly the same grade as Hamilton does now. So in this alternative, there's not a big hill for bicycles or pedestrians that have to climb over. It's it's just about five or six feet of elevation difference to get over the freeway. The second alternative studied is the Campbell Loop. On street facilities are exactly the same. Uh but what this alternative would do is have an atgrade crossing on the west side. So, this would be an enhanced crossing, but it would be physically on the roadway with paint and uh an RFB, a rectangular rapid flashing beacon or other mechanisms to alert a vehicle to the opportunity of a pedestrian crossing on the left side of your image. There'd be a new structure over State Route 17 disconnected from the existing bridge. So, we're building a new structure to create that land for our bicycles and pedestrians without reducing the number of lanes on the bridge. And then in the loop, what you'll see is we actually come down and around underground and cross under the existing northbound loop on ramp. The reason for that is that allows us to have a grade separated at that high volume crossing. The reason we loop around is because we want to maintain the Americans with Disabilities Act compliance. So along the path there's a maximum slope that can be achieved and that loop is used essentially to make it longer to allow us vertically to be able to achieve the necessary grades required. We did also look at whether or not we can get up and over. Unfortunately, because of the light rail structure that's just about a couple hundred feet to the east, if we wanted to go over that ramp, we would also need to go over the the LRT structure, which would be a significant impediment to

usage or have a complex switchback structure that can be very cumbersome for cyclists. uh when you have kind of switchbacks in a narrow footprint, your bikes have to slow down and maneuver hard turns and then they lose all their momentum and then they ultimately don't want to use the facility. So, there's a lot of reasons that that quadrant right there is really narrow uh and constrained. The third alternative studied uh looked at trying to minimize that outofdirection travel. It would have a new structure over state route 17 uh but it would have upgrade crossings on both the existing ramps. So we would upgrade those ramp crossings. It decreases that outofdirection travel but it preserves a lot of conflicts that is a little bit uh misaligned with the input that we heard from the community. And then finally we said what's the absolute minimum we could do to get a a shared use facility uh on the existing bridge. So this is really the the minimalist this is a lowcost alternative. This would be reassigning the the space on the existing structure by removing sidewalks and moving barriers and creating space on the south side of Hamilton Avenue. But to do that on the existing structure, we would need to remove the sidewalk on the north side of Hamilton, which could be a significant impediment to pedestrian usage, and there's not adequate space for bike lanes in this alternative. So, a lot of drawbacks with that lowcost option of trying to improve these crossings. We then evaluated all of these um uh across the the metrics that you see. So each column on this graphic are the metrics we previously described and the rows on the left are each of the alternatives including the no build. A full circle is good, an empty circle is bad. We evaluated these against their peers. Real quickly, the southern route being fully grade separated uh and having a relatively flat profile was scoring very well for its bicycle and pedestrian accommodations, ease of use and physical separation, but it is the

most costly alternative. Similarly, the Campbell Loop kind of struck a a um a balance there. It did have some physical separation, so it scored well there, but it also retained some atgrade crossings. Uh and again it because of that loop it had an elongated path of travel that might discourage usage. Um the straight shot and the minimalist both remained at grade crossings at the ramp. So they generally had a a more likely impact to traffic as pedestrians are crossing. They did not address a lot of the conflicts and stress levels and physical separation that were key to the the project success, but they are a lot cheaper and that can be beneficial for its own reasons obviously. So in conclusion, of the three al of the four alternatives studied, uh the southern route really did score um uh it it really did shine as compared to its peers. Uh again with our consultation with Calrans, this was an alignment that they were favorable to because of its fully grade separated facilities. We then went back to the the community. Uh we attended the October Fest fund run as well as held a virtual community outreach workshop in November. uh and we went back to the community and said, "This is what we're thinking. This is how we've escorted them." And we did hear that we had concurrence with the recommended alternative. Uh the the public that was engaged did continue to uh voice a preference for a full for the fully separated configuration. Uh and they did also demonstrate a preference for even if it's a slightly longer alignment, the flatter, more comfortable facilities. And so, um, with that, we recommended in the alternative analysis, uh, feasibility study that the southern route be the alternative for a preferred separated facility through this crossing. And Amy, I'll hand it back to you to talk about next steps.

Thank you, John. So with um council's approval acceptance of the feasibility um today we then will be looking at the next steps which is to initiate the cowrans development process that is um very time consuming as you can see the first step would be project initiation document that we need to go to count cow trans and then there's the setting of the scope and trying to come up with the schedule and cost and so forth. And that's about a 12 month process and then that would be followed by the uh project approval and then we get into the plans and specs and construction. So this will be a very it will require a lot of time for us to even move to the construction phase. But I think more importantly is that we need to look at what um funding sources we have to enable us to move forward. And so we would be pursuing grant funding to make this happen. Um and in fact the next item that we will be sharing with you is um putting an application in for the measure B project uh grant program to allow us to start the PID the project initiation document for this um project if should council approve the feasibility study and um so I do so there's staff recommendation is for city to adopt a resolution accepting the final feasibility study for the Hamilton Avenue state route 17 bicycle overcrossing. But I do want to note that by doing so it really allows um the project to move forward and and and also we because there are other projects that are happening in the vicinity of Hamilton such as the Hamilton public

improvement project and also we're working on the multimmoal transportation plan that with this feasibility study it really lends itself to for the concept to be integrated into those plans. So that's really this is really the first step for us to consider so that we can move those other projects forward. And one other thing to note is that as part of the safe streets for all program um with the acceptance of this and we move forward with the PID that sort of helps us in when that safe streets for all program a plan is completed it really leverages those funding opportunities there. So, so with that staff is here to and we'll be happy to take any questions. There are three of us to answer any questions that you may have.

First of all, thank you very much for your presentation, both presentations. Uh they were very thorough and uh and well explained and I appreciate the fact that you also sought public input u prior to making the recommendations before us. So first I'll ask my colleagues if there are questions. Go ahead. Go ahead. Sure. Um just just one this is really excellent presentation. Could you say a little bit more about the possibility if you looked at it of um under crossings to to as another great separate option?

Absolutely. And I'll flip back just through the slides real quick. I I'll use this graphic just to help. So, um, the challenge with undercrossings, uh, first of all, we don't want to cross under Highway 17, right? It's already depressed below Hamilton Avenue. So, inherently, we want to cross over the top, but there are opportunities to cross under the other two ramps. The west, the southbound diagonal on-ramp on the west, because of its proximity to Salomar Lane, there's not a lot of opportunity to get under it. And so if we wanted to implement a undercrossing on the west side of 17, uh we'd need to extend down and along the ramp and then cross under it and then come back and get up and over State Route 17. So the compatibility on the west side just doesn't really align with the existing conditions. The loop on the east side does open that opportunity and that's why the Campbell Loop alternative did have an under crossing um in that quadrant. Uh but again because of the ability to get down and up, we had to have a loop in there because we could not get over State Route 17 and under the loop on-ramp without adding some extra length. And one nuance of this is we would have a convenient stair so that you know individuals that could use a staircase could cut the corner there, but it is still a longer alignment for cyclists or anyone on like a motorized or an electric scooter.

Thank you. That's extremely helpful. You're welcome. Yeah, thank you. Excellent presentation is uh I'll push that as well. Um as far as taking the next step on the uh the funding aspect of this, um I think that we'll be talking about that in 9.2. But so let me just reserve my comments on funding to come back at that point because I think you but I just have a question about that. So um just on the uh the c the southern route alternative if you could explain a little more the green line of what that means from a enhanced bike lane as to what you're talking about there.

Absolutely. So in the westbound direction of Hamilton Avenue because of the length of this facility there is a likelihood that uh cyclists may not want to cross the street and use the facility. So, we wanted to include a redundant facility that was enhanced above the existing condition. In the existing condition, there are no bike lanes whatsoever. Well, in this configuration, because the southern sidewalk is being moved off of the bridge, we would remove the southern sidewalk. There's some additional space on the bridge and on Hamilton Avenue that we're proposing to reallocate that into a bike lane on Hamilton Avenue westbound.

Very good. And then the uh the dashed green component of that is that going across the uh entrance uh ramp is that okay that is correct. So in conflict zones where you would have uh vehicles and cyclist crossing uh the standard practice is to do a skip strike dash green through that area. Okay. All right. Not sure I want to use it on that particular uh location. Oh come I'll have other comments later. um on uh southern rough is that all keltrans property? It is

great question. Uh it can be designed either way. So if we wanted to place it on the fry property uh as part of a dedication under future development, that's something that could be achieved. Similarly, if we wanted to retain it entirely on Calrans property, that could be achieved as well. It would introduce some additional walls. So, there's a cost implication, but at this point in the feasibility study, we we could go either way with it. Yeah. I didn't want to imply to try and tie in other projects. Uh I' I'd like to kind of get it standing by itself. So, it sounds like that would be Calrans property to do it that way. It would be viable like Yeah. Yeah. We would likely focus it being Calr.

Yeah. Okay. All right. And then you mentioned ADA compliance on your others and just to if you could talk to ADA compliance on the southern route alternative.

Absolutely. Uh so under any scenario we would need to have ADA compliance with our proposed improvements. Uh that would be a maximum longitudinal grade of 5%. Uh so uh in those other alternatives uh the profile shown are a lot steeper. They all are compliant. But even a 5% grade can be a dis a it can influence cyclist behavior and pedestrian behavior. Uh that generally best practice is for cyclists to feel very little impact on their energy and their momentum is about 2 to 3%. So that's where we'd like to stay in the southern route because it's a longer facility. we can keep it flatter and so it really feels like a regular road navigating through the city as opposed to feeling like you're climbing a hill or or riding down into a valley.

Very good. Thank you. I'll reserve my other comments for comment. So on the southern route where on the westbound Hamilton Avenue where the report says that you're u removing the south sidewalk, how does that affect pedestrians? Is that prohibited then or?

Great question. We would direct pedestrians to either the northern sidewalk that would remain or onto the new facility. Uh the addition of the bike lane in the westbound direction requires space on the existing bridge without widening it. So that space we had recommended be reallocated from the existing sidewalk on the south side to a bicycle facility on the north side in this in this alternative. Okay. Thank you. Um, Vice Mayor Scazola, did you have any comments you wanted to make or questions I should say?

Oh, sorry. No, thank you. Okay. Thank you. I just question. I want to make sure I understood this. So with the southern route, did you say did you say then that the um the current overcrossing would pedestrian bicycle overcrossing if you want to call it that would have to be removed. So on the existing structure we would be we would be realloc

Yeah. So on the existing structure, we would be reallocating where those lanes sit. And in this proposal, we are removing the sidewalk on the south side of Hamilton Avenue to add a bike lane on the north side of Hamilton Avenue. Works. So that spa, it's roughly the same amount of space, the existing sidewalk to fit a bike lane. Uh so because the improvements are on the south side, the recommendation was uh a pedestrian is more likely to cross the street to the north side than a cyclist is. So we were we had reassign the space accordingly.

Okay, good. And then of course in doing that it would basically require everyone traveling from west to east to use the new route. Even though it's kind of not a straight shot, it would Okay. Correct. Although pedestrian travel on sidewalks is two ways. So a pedestrian could also simply cross to the north side of Hamilton Avenue. Yes. Yeah. But we are building this facility. We want to encourage people to use it. The purpose of the project is to create that low stress environment. It is out of direction and that is a challenge with the project footprint uh and the trade-offs we are trying to strike.

I understand it. It seemed to me that if the u the sidewalk were retained there on the southern route, you'd have a lot of people not wanting to use the new route because you have to go down and around and so they just I'm just going to walk across the bridge and certainly possible we would have barricades and other mechanisms to prevent people and the sidewalk would be removed. So they would be quite literally walking on the roadway. Um, in a future phase, if this was something that was important to council, we could further evaluate the addition of the westbound bike lane versus the removal of the southern sidewalk and and weigh those pros and cons in a future phase. It's not something that needs to be set in stone at this. Thank you.

Okay. Yes. Um, Vice Mayor Scazola. Yeah, sorry. I I did actually have one question. Uh I was curious about obviously we're going to be pursuing grant funding, but uh can we do the no build in the meantime? You know, like is it seems that that's not too expensive or or I forget if it reported the exact expense, but I believe the report said that it was minimal uh to at least get a bike lane in there while we pursue the grant funding. So, I'd like to know a little bit more about that. Um yeah, great great question. Um, just for clarity, there were four alternatives and then a no build. The no build would be the do nothing scenario, but I believe you're referring to the minimalist uh proposal. Is that correct?

Oh, yes, thank you. Yeah.

Perfect. Um, so yeah, we did estimate that the minimalist would be on the order of I believe it was 6 to $800,000 uh to perform the works. And included in that work would be essentially uh removing the northern sidewalk and investing that um investing those dollars on converting the southern sidewalk to a wider facility and then enhancements at the intersection. Uh it's certainly something that council could choose to do if if they wanted to. Um I would say that there is likely some throwaway cost associated with that. So, we would have to look into what the potential um opportunity for reuse versus uh work that would essentially be replaced if we were to go forward with the southern alternative in a longer term horizon.

And so there's there's no room Oh, go ahead, please. If I may add, it still involves CALR. um in our initial conversations with them, this is not something that they um would wouldn't want to accept just because of the safety components and how we're introducing the at grade crossings. Yes, thank you. That is that is appropriate. Calr would have approval authority and generally they would look for you to do more than the minimalist. Um although we you know could present it as a near-term solution but we would have to engage Cal Transfer approval on that.

And I guess uh what I'm really asking is uh what minimal things can we do you know that that we in the meantime as we're pursuing grant funding like I know that we obviously have a lot of plans for Hamilton in general. So I know at some point we are going to be improving the bike lanes and and whatnot. So, I just kind of want to have a good picture of I love that we have this, you know, on the table and and when we have the grant fundings, we can do this, but in the meantime, I'm wondering if we can do anything that's minimal cost that can help people, you know, uh getting off at the VTA station and just just for safety like in the meantime before we can actually do a big project like this. Hi, there are a couple of things that we could do. Enhance the crosswalks by uh making them high visibility

ladder crosswalks. That is something that we approached cow trans for the loop on ramp. We noted that um the gore area where there used to be channelizers mark off one of the two lanes for the the loop on ramp um that they needed to be replaced. We also asked that they uh install a high visibility crosswalk and yield markings ahead of the crosswalk. So that's something that can be done in near term pretty low cost and great captains would be doing that not us. Oh okay fantastic. Thank you. That answers my question. Right. It's about our facilities. Same could be done with the southbound on that.

Thank you. Uh now I will ask if there are any members of the public that would like to comment on this matter. Uh and I do have one uh card. Um Susan Landry.

Hello again. Think I'm on there. Uh thank you for the study. This has been a problem that we've had for a long time. Take your life in your hands trying to cross that street there. I'm very concerned about the cost factor though and how much grant money are you really actually going to get. So this item right now is to accept the feasibility study. The next item is funding and moving forward. Um I'd like a little bit of clarification on what really would be expected out of pocket from the city. The southern route is what 10 to 15 million. I doubt you're going to get that whole thing by a grant. uh you have staff time over what couple years and you still haven't gotten to city hall improvements, the city hall, the community center master plan and it just seems like it's at this magnitude of project to try to expect to get the whole thing in grants is not realistic and in the meantime what other projects is the city not doing with because of the limited staff time and I'll speak on the other item.

Thank you. Does anyone from the staff want to comment on this? Make sure there's no other public comments. Oh, okay. U so I'll ask if there are any other comments uh by members of the public. Nothing online. Um we have no other comments from the public. Okay.

Yes. As with any grant, I mean that is true that it wouldn't be um no cost to the city, right? And typically grants were looking at local match that we would what that we would have to put in there to make it more competitive for us and that percentage could vary depending on the grant program. Some are 10% local match, some are 25, some are 30%. So definitely there will be a cost from the city, but we're hoping that if we can leverage more grant funding, then it's really the local match component that we would be um coming from the city.

Thank you. Um I I want to uh make the decision on two points. One is one is the project and the other is the funding. Um you've got them as two separate discussions. So I'll I'll reserve my comments on funding uh for for that part of the discussion. But uh but as far as um the need of going forward with this um I've walked tried to walk that that section and ride my bike that section many times and it is a just a terrifying aspect to to get across those two. Uh uh it doesn't matter which one. Both of them are the same way. So, uh, I'd really encourage us to, uh, be able to move forward with the southern route, uh, because that eliminates the, uh, the need to go across, uh, both of those. the the high-profile pro um pedestrian crossing is you know those those cars are coming you know at 30 miles an hour by the time they get around that you know coming up Hamilton Honda fries heading heading to work or wherever they're going there and they're not looking for pedestrians. So, uh I I really want to emphasize a uh a desire and an interest in the uh uh in the southern the southern alternative because uh to me from a from a a biker that's not a very fast biker uh it definitely gives the uh the better option uh from my perspective on that. But I want to reserve my comments on funding for the next 9.2.

Oh yes, Sergio.

Thank you. Um the this the study, the report, the presentation, everything was excellent in terms of laying out the alternatives, the pros and cons. Um I initially had a number of questions. Uh most of which answered and then you answered my followup. um just in terms of other alternatives that were not presented. Um and I I I think it's very important for members of the public um to also understand the just the physical limitations and constraints that we're dealing uh with especially when you you add in um trying to maximize the the bikeability and the experience which really translates to usability. Are people actually going to um use the space? um along with ADA requirements um and again just the physical constraints with a really complex piece of property with um different stakeholders here. So um in in short um just really bringing an open mind to this and listening through the pros and cons. I'm I'm also in favor of um the the southern route at this point. This is going to be such a a critical piece. So, it really is important to to get it right and um there there's a separate discussion to be had around funding and and u what what does that actually look like and are we able to get but I I I don't think this is the time to be pennywise and pound foolish because I I literally think this will be one of the most critical um segments as we're thinking about the future um of of Campbell to make sure that uh as as a girls with some of what we planned for that there really is that access, usability, bikeability and the access um to to uh light rail uh as well. So um in support of that going forward exploring and then u seeing uh from there starting with with what the ideal goal would be and then having funding discussion to see what is feedback. Thank you.

Thank you. Yes.

Um I would also support the southern route. Um, I know we've been talking about this improvement that that area for many years and um, obviously the funding is a is a big issue because of the the magnitude of the amount of money. Um if we move forward with the uh approval tonight um and pursue grant funding, does the project then go into the capital u improvement plan as a future project and and as funding becomes available uh it's determined to move forward. Is that how if we if we weren't approve it tonight, what would happen to that to this project? Yeah, that's a really good question because if we get the feasibility study completed, that doesn't necessarily mean that it gets programmed in that CIP, right, until we have funding. So, we would almost be programming it a phase at a time where funding is available. But we have this road map to guide us. has.

Okay. I don't have any. I'm sorry. Yes. Vice Mayor Scazo.

Thank you, uh, Mayor Fertado. I was wondering, uh, along the lines of I Well, I agree with Council Member Lopez's previous comments about this being a really critical, uh, piece of infrastructure for Campbell and just, uh, you know, the larger community in general. Uh but thinking around that realm, I was curious which of these options is best for, you know, future when it comes to housing. We're, you know, hoping to have a nice dense housing project in eventually at the Fry site, former Fry site. So I'm just curious out of these options, which one would be most conducive for, you know, future housing projects in that area? Uh, I'll try to address that. And I think just for the reasons that were stated before, the southern route's probably the most preferred. Um, and sort of anticipating development along that route. We do anticipate greater pedestrian and bicycle use along that corridor. As uh, Director Ole mentioned earlier. Um, so I I think to answer your question uh succinctly, it would be the southern route that would would be the most preferred.

Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you. I would agree with the the comments of my colleagues. So um there being no further discussion, do we have a motion? I'd like to propose a motion to uh acceptance of the final feasibility study for the Hamilton Avenue State Route 17 bicycle overcrossing. I'll second. Second. Oh, you have a motion to second. I'm sorry. I'll defer to

Oh, okay. I'll defer to Vice Mayor. Okay, got it. Vice Mayor Skazola. Okay. Roll call, please. Council member Lopez. Hi. Council member Hines. Hi. Council member Vby. Hi. Vice Mayor Skisola. Hi. Mayor Fado. Hi.

So, my my understanding now is this matter gets submitted to CALR and um hopefully then they make a decision that uh they feel is best. That's if we move forward with the pit process with the next item for submitting to CALR. We have to have the level of funding to go in front of them. So that would be the project initiation. I guess my question is they have to approve one of the routes first. Right.

Right. But we have already initiated conversation engaged them already. But in order for us to really be serious about the project and get their interest, we do need to um follow their process which first step is the project initiation phase. Okay. Thank you. Yes.

Okay. We now move to item 9.2. This is the authorization to submit um measure B bicycle and pedestrian planning studies grant application for the Hamilton Avenue Highway 17 overcrossing um at the Campbell Technology Parkway. Good evening, Mayor Fado, members of the city council. Last November, the VTA issued a call for projects for the bicycle and pedestrian planning studies grant. Uh this project, the program's purpose is to fill gaps in the existing bike and pedestrian network. Um the program supports leading projects from planning efforts to an actual capital project to to construct. And uh just to note that uh projects are eligible only if they were included in the original ballot measure from 2016 and that the project we just discussed was uh the feasibility was funded in part with uh measure B funds from this very same program. So, we're proposing grant applications for two projects. The the PID phase or project initiation document uh for the Hamilton State Route 17 project and then

also this Campbell Technology Parkway bicycle overcross feasibility study. PID documents uh inform CALR regarding a project's scope, costs, potential impacts, schedule. Calr just requires PIDs for any project that will be built in the state highway system. The cost estimate is $500,000. The second project is the Campbell Technology Parkway bicycle overcrossing feasibility study. The scope is very similar to the feasibility study that was performed for the Hamilton project and the cost estimate is $400,000. This map shows the general location, the end points of such an overcrossing on the west side of Highway 17. You see a smaller ellipse. Uh that is the location where there is a walkway from Railway Avenue that connects with the Lasatas Creek Trail. It's between Avalon Apartments to the south and St. Anton's apartments and town homes to the north. The other side of the Overcross would be similar east of Highway 17 closer to Campbell Technology Parkway. The program requires a minimum local match of 10%. But staff is recommending 30% because the grant application process can be very competitive with other agencies competing for funds and they're likely to propose 30%. And that will maximize the points scored. and potential fund sources for the local match include vehicle impact fee and gas

tax funds. So the recommendation is to adopt the resolution authorizing public works director to submit grant applications for both projects. And that concludes my presentation. If have any questions? Thank you. Members of the council, any questions? So the my understanding is that uh we're the general fund commitment would be 150k for the Hamilton and 120k for the Campbell Tech Park. Is that correct? The two suggested fund sources. Yeah. So coming out of the general fund.

Just clarify when we speak general fund. No, the the funding sources would be the vehicle impact fee uh and gas tax fee. Um, those aren't general fund fees. Those are restricted funds outside the general fund. Do we have the money? Yes, we get money for gas tax and we get vehicle impact fees. It's the question is what isn't getting funded with those now because we're putting it towards this and there other capital improvements like road improvements or um street projects and Amy could speak to that. But essentially, they are funds that are required and restricted to be spent on these types of things. But by spending on these types of things, you're probably not spending on on other things like this. But can we get it is outside the

Can we get an understanding as to what would what would not be funded? I don't think I can answer that um specifically on what will not get funded because on the vehicle impact fees, we look to that fund to support if we have additional needs in our street repair that perhaps is not part of our annual street maintenance funding. Um and uh we leverage that fund for um you know other things that come up that that this gas tax cannot fund that annual street maintenance cannot. So we have used the vehicle impact fees in the past to help us with some crack seal projects for example.

Okay. Well I I am very excited about the Campbell Tech Park. just uh you know, Campbell Village has been taxed and trapped forever. So, um just I guess it's more a comment that that I'm making, but uh but I think that's just fantastic to be able to see that in here uh to get that get the feasibility of that. Uh, I I would and I just like to see if it's possible to consider the bike path from Campbell Tech Park to Campbell Avenue paralleling just to the outside of the west side of Highway 17 retaining wall. Maybe it adds another 100 yards to the to the get to the light rail, but should be substantially cheaper. Uh, so just uh and meaning it still being CALR CALR property. I can't imagine Kelran's built the retaining wall exactly on their property line. Uh so um I'm hoping that there's four three or four feet for a for a bike trail. So just I don't know if that can be included in there. Um but I think that's uh some consideration that I would like to see. Okay.

Other comments? Okay. We'll um now invite any members of the public that would like to speak on this matter. Uh technology park definitely we need a bridge get us across the freeway. I'm going to go back to what I said earlier. uh we've had a history of getting grants and then not being able to do matching funds and uh Terry's your comment what else doesn't get done and Terry came to a meeting in our neighborhood couple I don't know last week or so and our biggest thing is traffic calming so you know we would certainly love to see more money thrown into traffic calming and be able to do something and that's a project that doesn't get funded when things like this gets funded and I'm just concerned we keep doing feasibility studies and things like that and then you don't have $5 million to match to meet the grant. And I know there has been a couple grants that we've gotten the money but lost it because we couldn't do the matching. Uh you know, we need work in city hall. We need work at the community center. This distracts staff from what they need to do on other things. So just a word of caution on what we're doing. and you know 100 500 or whatever we're putting in doesn't seem like a rot now, but does it just sit on the shelf later because you don't have five 10 million to build them out?

Thank you. Members of the public wish to speak on this item. Seeing none, I'll bring this matter back to the council for further discussion.

I'm Sergio. Yeah, I'll just um I I just want to say I fully propose this going forward as well as making sure that our uh application is uh competitive. So So I do support going to 30%. Um this is another one of those projects that as council member Hines says is just um absolutely critical and I think not just for for this area but for really growing the future of of our community. Um and it it's going to be complex to get there. we're going to need those partnerships and outside sources of funding. So, I do support looking at this to make sure that we do so in in a a thoughtful, considered way.

Thank you. I'll make a comment myself uh regarding this. Uh I'm glad to see that there's an interest in um a pedestrian bicycle crossing there at Campbell Technology Parkway. Um you know, the area still is pretty much of an industrial area in the surrounding area. So, you know, they're putting in a lot of pedestrian and bicycle traffic, which will come with the new housing development, I think, will impact that area in a negative way. Um, in terms of um a lot of people having to use surface streets to go around uh instead of a convenient bike and pedestrian overcrossing. And so I I think uh in the long run I would very much like to see this overcrossing there at the technology parkway.

Just to just to add on to that mayor mayor the uh it's not only that industrial area but it's also camp village that can use this and we that's the trapped part that there's really no way to bike out of that area and so this would give an opportunity to be able to bike out of that area more effectively. Thank you. Um, could I have a motion then if you're ready for that?

I propose a motion to authorize authorization to submit 2016 measure B bicycle and pedestrian planning studies grant application for Hamilton Avenue Highway 17 bicycle overcrossing project initiation document and Campbell Technology Parkway bicycle overcrossing feasibility study. I'll second We have a motion and a second. Um, there's no further discussion. Roll call, please. Council member Lopez. I. Council member Hines. Hi. Council member Vivey. Hi. Vice Mayor Skazola. Hi. Mayor Fado.

Hi. Uh, thank you very much. Um, I I want to wave my u usual report to um just just make a a few personal comments with um the Super Bowl coming uh uh this uh today. Um and as I I shared before um number of agencies I'm involved with VTA being one of them have been very involved with preparing just making sure everyone um can can be safe. But along with that um I know I've heard from many people in our community feeling a lot of anxiety and concern um around um potential um immigration actions. And um we in the the past week we've seen reinsurance reassurances that th those actions uh won't won't uh be taking place but um uh still there is that um the the the sense of fear and of of fear and anxiety that I'm hearing from our residents. So, I really just wanted to uh reaffirm my own commitment and and uh what I've heard um clearly as as our community's values um in including from police and conversations that that I've had um that that we follow state law um and and not cooperating on immigration um enforcement actions and we'll continue to do so and that uh really just want to reaffirm that this is a welcoming community uh for for all. Um, so I I I appreciate my colleagues, our staff who who share those values. Um, but this is a time when we're seeing a lot of uh fear, unfortunately, misinformation. So, um, I did just feel it was important to say a few words

then. Thank you.

Yeah, I definitely want to second council member Lopez's comments uh associated with that that fear fear and concern. So, very much appreciate that comments. uh just uh the uh committee activities that I've been involved in uh partners in local governance. It's a Cal ICMA and Cal city managers meeting that I uh am on and participated on. It was an excellent uh discussion about staff and electeds uh combination of working together. I did the chamber board of directors swearing in and that was fantastic to see the new board. Uh I did the went to the Cal city's uh housing community and economic development uh committee and policy committee. Had some good discussions there. Um my continued emphasis to coordinate and and work with San Jose. I went to Pam Foley's D9 2026 priorities discussion. It was quite quite helpful for that. So in the valley uh water AFL CIO AI and tech brief was really good because of just discussion around the impact on labor for that and then the kel uh the legislative spotlight association that uh MC by Sergio and council member Sergio was uh was excellent to be able to see that and then the CVNA uh meeting and being able to chaired by Susan at the local Santa Clara County Fire and union. I gave an ADA and conservation update uh but got a lot we got a lot of feedback about uh traffic calming that I'll be bringing to the uh the work plan discussion. Then I want to do a shout out to Reps, our local printing company right down uh right downtown. And uh uh they do a terrific job and made our Christmas card several times just if they could make me look 20 years younger. They they don't seem to be able to do that. Thank you.

Thank you. reps does do a very good job and they do all the printing for the Campbell Veterans Memorial Foundation as well. So, Councilwoman By So, I attended the city's association meeting uh last month and we talked about priorities for the year and we'll be finalizing those at our meeting in February. Vice Mayor Skazola,

uh no report at this time. Thank you. And I'll simply report that I recently had the opportunity to attend the US Conference of Mayors meeting in Washington DC. Um it was a very good meeting. It's very cold in Washington DC, needless to say. Um it's interesting. Uh the problems that cities have uh are shared by most cities in the country. Uh affordable housing certainly was a big topic of discussion. Um, uh, Senator Elizabeth Warren was present and she spoke about a housing measure that, uh, provided for affordable housing that passed the Senate 100%. Uh, and that almost never happens, especially in this era. And now it has gone to the House, although it's hung up in the House. uh and uh there's a reluctance to bring it up right now uh by the majority in the house for reasons I don't understand but anyway it would be a very well funded um program for affordable housing. Uh, cities are also concerned about infrastructure. Um, they continue to focus on jobs, but by far the largest part of the discussion dealt with immigration and the concern that city mayors have and city staffs about the current situation in the country on immigration and the tactics of ICE. There was a special presentation by Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Fry who came in specially just to make a presentation to the mayors. did a very very nice job and summarized many of the issues very well. So, I'm sure I'm not surprising anyone with these comments about uh immigration, but it's uh certainly uh captivating a good part of the time of city mayors throughout the United States. That is my report. I thank everyone for attending and comments that were made tonight. And with that, I will adjourn the meeting.