Council Transportation Committee - Regular Meeting

Three, which is oral communications. This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the committee on any matter not on the agenda. Speakers are allowed to speak on any topic for up to three minutes. During this section, state law prohibits the committee from acting on non agenda items. Would any member that means if you say something interesting, we can't respond to you.

Would any member of the public on the line like to provide comment on a on non agenda items? If so, please click the raise hand button in Zoom or approach the lectern if you are here in person. We will take in person speakers first. Staff will display the timer on the screen, and I believe we're doing two minutes. So are there any in person speakers on general public?

Okay. Seeing none, are there any rituals? No hand, please. Okay. In in that case, we will move on to item number four, which is approval of meeting minutes.

So the minutes for the December 2025 meetings are presented for approval tonight. Would any member of the public joining us either virtually or in person like to write a comment on the next? Anybody in person? Anybody on no. K. Then I'll bring the item back for committee deliberation and action. Are there any corrections or comments on the minutes, among the committee members? If not, can I see a motion to approve?

So moved.

Second. I take all those in favor. Okay. Passes unanimously. We'll now move on to new business. 5.1 of our new business is to amend and add new sections to article 10, which is the transportation demand management. So article 10, chapter nineteen, nineteen is the motor vehicles and traffic section of the Mountain View Municipal Code to establish a citywide TDM program. TDM standing for transportation demand management. So let's see. Okay.

The next part of my script is a little repetitive, but I'll see if there's anything that I need to read here. Item five one is title demand and add new sections, start with 10, transportation demand management, chapter 15. This appears to be what I already just told you. The staff presentation will be provided by Beth Facho, transportation planner, and Allison Boyer, assistant works. Good evening.

My name is Allison Boyer. I'm the assistant public works works director for transportation business services, and I have with me tonight Ben Pacho, who is our senior transportation planner. And we also have our consultants, Natalie McCarville and principal consultant, and Jeff England, who is vice president of program operations from Steer joining us from to help answer questions. And we're here tonight to discuss the DROP citywide transportation demand management ordinance. Okay.

So city council identified the development of a transportation demand management ordinance as a strategic priority for fiscal years 2023 and 2025. It was identified as a priority as a result of the city's 2030 general plan, the greenhouse gas reduction program, sustainability action plan or SAP four, precise plans, as well as regional and state laws. To date, the city's approach to TDM spans a mix of project size and land use types. There are over 27 entitled development projects in Mountain View that have TDM requirements as part of their conditions of approval. These current PDM requirements include different targets and measures.

The proposed, sorry. The proposed ordinance aligns with the existing policies and strategizes TDM standards and monitoring requirements. It ensures consistency with the MTA handbook, the BMT screenings, and the city's greenhouse gas reduction program while also standardizing trip reduction targets, the TEM planning process, and monitoring enforcement monitoring and enforcement provisions. Next slide. So reviewing the project workflow, staff is currently in the project phase focused on developing the ordinance language seen here in blue.

Over the course of the project, staff has engaged key stakeholders and advisory bodies to gain a broad understanding of current practice with TDM, as well as how requirements can be further streamlined and made more effective under the ordinance. Key insights were gathered from the Downtown Business Association and the TMA. One on one interviews were held with developers, employers, property managers, and community members. Collectively, the input gathered has been used to guide the direction of the project, including its vision and goals in the TDM framework. Staff presented the project vision and goals to BPAC, EPC, and CTC in 2023, where members voiced their support for the project's objectives.

In 2025, staff returned to BPAC and EPC to present the TDM policy framework that includes trip production standards, reporting elements, and enforcement provisions. CTC and city council reviewed and supported the proposed framework in quarter two and 2025. Staff will present the TDM ordinance to council for the first and second reading in May 2026. Next slide. The vision statement, which went to CTC on 01/30/2024, states that the TDM Hornets will seek to reduce single occupancy vehicle trips for new development and increase use of multimodal transportation alternatives that are sustainable, equitable, effective, and respond to the changing demands.

The goal of the project is we're informed by existing conditions analysis and date. And then the staff recommendation, which is a little different than what you read is the staff is recommending that city council adopt an ordinance of the city council repealing and reenacting chapter 19, motor vehicles and traffic of article 10, transportation demand management of the city code to establish a citywide PDM program and finding the amendments to be exempt from the CEQA pursuant to CEQA guidelines section 15 sorry, fifteen three zero eight. Oh, sorry, next slide. And one more. So a quick overview of the TDM.

At a high level, the TDM framework seeks to streamline and implement TDM requirements across a project's lifespan from the entitlement phase to the post occupancy phase. The new TDM ordinance will apply to all new development, modifications, change of use, and expansions of existing sites generating 200 or more net new average daily trips or ADT. This will apply across all land uses, residential, commercial, and mixed use. There are, however, a couple exemptions. Those those are for a 100% affordable units, very small projects, which are classified as single family developments of 12 units or fewer, multifamily residential developments of 20 units or fewer, or any office development that is 10,000 square feet or less, as well as patron driven projects, which with uses less than 100,000 square feet.

Projects will have to demonstrate a plan to reduce projected ADT by 20 to 50% through the use of approved TDM strategies and maintain program management and annual reporting post occupancy. The city will the city will maintain records of annual project reports, and any noncompliance may result in corrective action and or fines of theft by the city. Next slide. The production targets will be will be determined by size of the project, and they're divided into three categories. Small projects are 200 to $4.99 ADT.

Medium projects are 500 to 999 ADT, and large projects, which are a 100 I'm sorry, which are a thousand ADT. Projects will be required to implement TDM strategies that reduce ADT to the following levels of thirty, forty, and 50% respectively. TOD or transit oriented design projects and residential project will have reduction target levels of twenty, thirty, and 40% respectively. These thresholds were informed by the city's existing precise plan targets, as well as case studies of similar TEM programs in San Francisco, San Mateo County, Redwood City, and the city of San Jose. Next slide.

Prior to the entitlement, prospective applicants will be required to submit a TDM plan for city review. Specifics of the TDM plan will then be included in the conditions of approval preceding adoption by council. TDM plan will be comprised of two types of strategies. Core strategies offer an array of flexible, proven trip production strategies that applicants may select from to develop a project's TDM plan. Some examples of core strategies include transportation subsidies and ban pool incentives.

The auxiliary measures, which when paired with core strategies are complementary and more effective at reducing or and more effective at reducing trips. Some examples of auxiliary strategies are wayfinding improvements and transportation related marketing events. Applicants will have access to the TDM toolkit, which is designed to offer a menu of strategies that vary in scale and cost, allowing projects to create site specific TDM plans fit for their purposes. Next slide. Moving into the monitoring elements of the framework.

This slide illustrates the various reporting activities that projects will be responsible for, which are again organized based on project size. Small projects must report out annually for three years, medium projects for ten, and large projects for twenty. Additionally, residential and patron driven uses are exempt from additional project performance monitoring conducted through annual travel surveys and traffic counts. And with that, I'll pass it to Ben.

Thanks, Allison. So staff would like to note a few key updates, which have been incorporated into the TTM policy framework based on feedback we've received since last June's session with council. The proposed changes include exemptions such as for patron driven uses, implementation of housing action items, exemptions from site specific trip caps for residential and patron driven uses, updates to enforcement provisions, and optional TMA. For the first update, proposed patron driven uses less than net a 100,000 square feet will be exempted from the CDM program. Categorized as nonresidential, these project types typically generate trips that are primarily by patrons, customers rather than by employees.

Examples of such projects would include childcare centers, restaurants, entertainment, medical, retail, including general merchandise and groceries as well as other personal services. This exemption was incorporated into the framework recognizing the value of such uses that our neighborhood serving and also support economic vitality by attracting and retaining high quality retail and other service oriented. The next update relates to the city's housing element program, which went into effect in 2023. Provisions of the housing element require the city to adopt a TDM ordinance to help identify lower cost options for developers to meet TDM requirements. And to support this effort, the ordinance will allow residential parking reductions and exemptions for projects that enhance features of a TDM plan, which would achieve a higher level of trip reduction over and beyond the minimum requirement.

To satisfy the enhanced TDM criteria, residential project must either one exceed its ADT reduction target by at least 5% or to adopt one additional core strategy and two additional auxiliary strategies over the minimum required number from the toolkit. The enhanced team criteria presented are really intended to incentivize higher levels of trip reduction and reduce parking demand while increasing mobility options for residential projects. And the next update to the framework includes assumptions for monitoring and reporting requirements for residential and patient driven uses. Specifically, all residential and patient driven uses will be exempted by meeting site specific trip caps and associated ADT reduction targets. The exemptions also extends to the requirements to provide travel surveys and conduct traffic caps.

The noted exemptions here reflect existing conditions on local and state regulations, which seek to collectively reduce financial costs and administrative burdens related to delivering more affordable housing and neighborhood serving uses. However, so required of these projects would be the requirements to adopt and implement TDM map and provide ongoing annual TDM reporting in accordance with. And then moving ahead, the proposed ordinance seeks to align the enforcement provisions under city code enforcement violations and administrative penalties. This approach aligns with neighboring jurisdictions, which also quantify violations of noncompliance as the basis for administrative citations for under the muni code. So some examples of noncompliance might include failure of a project to submit annual TDM monitoring reports or maintain an ongoing TDM plan.

Additionally, updated enforcement provisions will consistently apply to all projects subject to the ordinance rather than by specific project conditions of the proposal. For the next framework update, proposed ordinance will not require projects of PSI to join the team. Membership in the team may will be optional and included in the TDM toolkit to incentivize new projects to join as a way to satisfy the team requirements and interpret. So while TMA membership will not be required, staff will work with the TMA to explore the process of establishing a property based assessment project or PIV following adoption of the ordinance. Similar to other jurisdictions, such as city Of Emeryville, the goal of establishing the PBIT will be to provide a long term and scalable approach to funding TMA provided services, including the Amigo shuttle.

Most notably, a PBIT would support growing membership in the TMA over time by clearly defining its governance structure and assessment of membership fees. Currently, staff is working with the project team to develop a cost estimation and implementation planning studies part of this work. The study will evaluate the range of city staff time and administrative resources required to administer the ordinance, including CDN plan review and ongoing monitoring of. The findings of this report will inform the basis of an annual CDM fee, which will

be intended to recover a portion

of the city's ongoing costs associated with implementing. Following completion of this fee study, staff will draft the resolution for the city council's review. While the TDM ordinance is in effect, its provisions and financial production standards and monitoring requirements will be codified in the city code. Additionally, the TDM program standards will be a key guiding document to supplement the citywide TDM program. The TDM program standards document will be an appendix to the MTA, may be updated periodically to reflect changes in travel patterns, technological innovation, and TDM best practices. And then for next steps, I'll pass it back to Allison.

So following the CDC review tonight, we will be taking this ordinance to counsel for comment or for the first read on May 12 and the second reading on May 26. That and anticipating final adoption of the ordinance in May 2026 with it going into effect in June 26. Once adopted, implementation steps will include development and refinement of the TDM program standards and the TDM toolkit, updating the precise plans and city code to implement housing element action items and ordinance provisions, presenting the annual TDM fee resolution to council for review and adoption, exploring the feasibility of establishing a property based assessment district or PBIG citywide, integration with the city's permitting and entitlement processes, and it's the establishment of ongoing monitoring and reporting systems, including identifying technology solutions and providers, and coordination with stakeholders and regional partners. And then next slide. And then again, we're here, staff is recommending the city council adopt an ordinance of the city council repealing and reenacting chapter 19, motor vehicles and traffic of article 10, transportation demand management of the city code to establish a citywide PDM program and binding the amendments to be exempt from pursuant to guidelines section fifteen three zero eight.

That that is our staff presentation. Okay. Thank you very much. That is always an exciting project for me to see how how our transportation demand management, program evolves. So I will now, we will now, take questions from committee members. Do any committee members have questions?

K.

Yes. Member McHalehsden.

Thank you for the report. Feel comfortable. So on on slide 12 where it says parking reduction and parking reductions, are we interpreting strictly by what the housing element says we what they can do, or are we making it fraud or so that's the things related to the parking?

So the housing element includes, I believe, three action items. One is to identify lower cost options for developers to meet their requirements, and then also identify criteria for projects that would qualify for these parking reductions and exemptions from parking minimums. So the ordinance here really kind of operationalizes that and defined would be for these projects too.

But it's not

Everything else, this is the only one I have sort of a concern on because it's a broader pitch. If we're building these units and there's restriction and they're and they don't have parking, parking's gonna flow into the neighborhoods. And so the quality of life and the congestion, the safety of people, all all the cars around is a concern to me. So is there any way we can do both protect the neighborhood, the traffic and the cars and so forth, and still meet this requirement?

Right. So the the residential ADT targets are set so that sufficient TDM strategies would be needed to be put in place to offset any parking offset any demand for additional parking that would be needed. So the idea is to qualify for these parking parking reductions and exemptions, they would either have to, again, one, meet a higher level of trip reduction over and be over and beyond what's required at the minimum or adopt additional strategies. So the idea is that reduced parking or no parking isn't a TDM program in and of itself.

You would need It's not by itself. Okay.

It's not a TDM program. It's sufficient. It's it's necessary, but it's not sufficient. And so enough TDM measures would need to be adopted to offset any additional demand for parking.

So they can get the reduced parking, but they're have to offset it with up?

Okay. Additional strategies Yeah. Okay. Or a percentage of reduction.

Is has anybody reached out to our partners like VTA or that that if we start ramping this up, they will look and see what they can ramp up for. VTAs have struggles right now. And so but is that something that we're gonna keep them as part of the loop so that when we do something or or see a project that they might say we can ask them beforehand. So when the planning process, we can say, hey. We're anticipating this. Can you look at a route? The

ordinance doesn't preclude any coordination with VTA. And so VTA is actually working on a equitable VNT mitigation program at a regional level. And that framework is being, I think, developed in coordination with, what's it, AB one thirty also sets a statewide program for VNT reduction. So all of these are strategies that are kind of being developed in the offering. And then once they get more confidence or consistency communication, we'd certainly kind of engage them on on when they would be needed to start then opening up the option for these developers to opt into that strategy.

Yeah. Thank you.

That's it.

I hope that's it.

Member Kameh, do you have questions? Okay. I have I have several. One is one is how what the opportunity will be to add additional tools to the toolkit over time, how that will work?

Right. So since EPC, we've

Or subtract if they're not working.

Certainly. It's very open ended. I mean, since EPC, we've added an additional five or six strategies. So it's it's a moving target, which is to say, I mean, these could be updated on a cadence, which makes sense. It could be on a yearly basis. But, certainly, once we begin monitoring, we'll understand the performance of these strategies, which makes sense, what are easier for projects to adopt.

Yeah. So so the toolkit is envisioned to be evergreen. So we can update it as either new strategies become common in the area or new technologies come about or new state AB regulations come, down the pipeline. But, the idea is as we also collect data from the reports coming in, we can also identify what are working, what is working, and we can also adjust those percentages with their ADT reductions. Or if we see developers really like one and they keep bringing it up and it's not in our toolkit, we can add it so that it's identified there.

So it is intended to be an evergreen. What the cadence is of updating it, we haven't quite figured out, but I think we'll see where this takes us in our first year. Okay. Great. That's the that's the answer I wanted, and I won't think of any more well, I'll just say the Toolkit is a little computer based at this point, so so that's good to hear it's that you're open to good to hear

that it's set free.

And then I also have questions about the parking that member McAllister brought up. When you've looked at how I've basically, the same fear that that member McAllister has that as you reduce parking, people perk on the street because I've done it. I've. And then there's less room for trees, widening sidewalks, street trees, all the other things we like to encourage and bike lanes to encourage other travel. So when you looked at how this works, you mentioned a bunch of other cities, but many of them seemed like San Francisco, San Jose.

They seemed, you know, if I lived in an apartment in San Francisco without parking, I would not be parking on the

street. So

have you really looked a lot at comparable cities? And by comparable, I don't there are dense places in you named Red City, I think. There are dense places in Redwood City and Mountain View, but actual comparable places where there where there's a lot of street parking available. Yeah. So I don't know if, Laurie, you can pull up our very last slide and it's in your packet, but we did put together, a pure city examples that we looked at that we have on that list.

Sunnyvale, East Palo Alto, Redwood City, San Mateo County, and San Jose, and what their trip production targets were and how they're, enhancing their TDM. And that shows you kind of where we fall. Example would be for Sunnyvale. For their offices, they are paying at a reduction of 65% of peak hour trips. So for ours, we have, 50% reduction.

So that gives you a but that, again, that's for offices. For the residential, they're targeting 30%. And for our residential, we go between 20 to 40, so depending on the size. East Palo Alto has a 40% reduction, both residential and nonresidential. So we we did try and meet what other cities in our area are doing.

And how do you count trip reduction? Because, honestly, when I lived at Park Place down the street, 100% of the time they gave me a parking place, and 100% of time I parked on the street, not knowing that. Would that be counted you in this metric, you would be counting that as a trip reduction because I did not if it was unbundled parking.

The points of egress and ingress for development, we determined in the space where traffic monitoring would be. But since for residential projects, we're not requiring, you know, measuring actual trip reduction targets. What we're doing is we're requiring adoption of CDM at a sufficient level, which would then offset demand for parking where they need parking. So in our analysis of looking at other peer cities and how they manage parking, this is very much an evolving space. San Jose would would probably be the first jurisdiction that handled both TEM and parking together where they've eliminated parking minimum citywide and adopted in in the same action of adopting a TDM order.

So San Francisco took it differently. If a project were to provide more parking than above what's normally provide or required in their code, they similarly require additional TDM measures to be adopted. So it's in a similar vein that we require a sufficient level of TDM in in in alignment with parking reductions and and elimination

of parking consumption.

Just to touch on the counting. For residential, our enforcement is based specifically on in your approved TDM, you say you're going to do something, you have to do it. It's not based on the actual trip reduction targets being met. So that's pretty much what I was saying. You could in a place with a lot of neighborhood parking, you could get your TDM credit by cutting down on on-site parking and people could just be parking in the neighborhood.

It does it's not reducing the trips, but it's qualifying for that particular is what I is saying. Only if you're using the housing element additional bonus. So you're going for an additional you've chosen either 5% more of reducing in your TDM, the plan to reduce it by five an additional 5% than what's required, or you're choosing one additional core and two auxiliary strategies. So in order to qualify to reduce the parking, you have to enact additional TDM measures above and beyond the base for that that side. Is it okay if I add something?

Yeah. Yeah. So the idea behind residential is that, for example, on a large apartment, resident a apartment owner would provide a bunch of strategies that are available for the residents living in the apartment building, but they don't have the ability to force the residents to do certain things versus if you're a large scale office employer, right, we would check on the enforcement because that office employer has more direct control over the trips that are going in and out of their of their business. But to qualify for that parking reduction or so if you're doing a large residential, you need 40% trip reduction. In order to get that housing element incentive, you would have to go 45% trip reduction or 40% with two additions.

Sorry. Diana, you wanna

Yeah. If I could just add a few more things. Diana Pancholi, principal planner with the planning division. Thank you for the question. I think the way I look at it is that, you know, this is one policy strategy that this the city is bringing forward.

There are other efforts that we are looking at, which will then have to will act together to see how parking involves on on-site. A lot of other jurisdictions that we have looked at use the residential permit parking program as a key strategy to kind of, you know, manage the parking spill making sure parking spillovers don't happen in the neighborhood, which is a obvious concern we hear with a lot of, developments in the city. The other part is that, you know, we will have to look at how our parking, related strategy in the TDM program is working out. All the recent develop residential developments that I have seen coming to council in the last two years, developers have said to us that parking is a key asset for our residents, and that is very key to the marketability of the project as well. Very few of them will come in with extremely reduced booking numbers.

So we're hoping, you know, it is going to be something that we'll be able to see. But right now, the developers have been telling us is really key for them to provide on-site tasks.

Okay. I'll save the rest of it. It's yeah. It sounds like something that is why it needs to be at the grant on slowing monitoring. And then I we all got email from various interested parties. One of them was whether whether parking reductions this is from Yimby, which so you've probably seen the the question, whether parking reductions could scale with the scale of the of the the.

Yeah. We are identifying next steps once the learning's adopted, how we would implement parking reductions, and we got a good comment from UPC which recommended scaling parking reductions based on a certain level. So whether it's, you know, one to 10% or one to 50%, the amount of credit that would be given would determine how much parking they reduce from. So that's something you need to further flesh out, but it's being considered.

It might be something we can add to the toolkit as we collect more data. Okay. And then are why you have something on active you'll know the phrase better than I will. Active transportation gaps. Do those include is there and as a possible thing that a developer could provide bridging those gaps, are other similar things that would encourage walking, like wider sidewalks and more tree canopy.

Are those also are those considered gaps, or how do you figure those? Because they certainly encourage walking. Do are they a part of the toolkit?

We would need to study how that would be operationalized in the toolkit, whether a certain number of trees, right, would qualify for us. I mean, it's about subject trip reduction. So to the extent that, you know, planting additional trees might achieve that, we need to study. But I think where could potentially qualify is pedestrian oriented uses and amenities, you know, that are oriented to, you know, active transportation to to the extent that, you know, multimodal improvements like by facilities and protection and green elements are are considered to that extent might be at least the nexus might be there to establish that, but we we need to further understand how to be in the toolkit.

But if a developer were to come in and and just and ask to do that as a measure, we would have that conversation and ask them to provide why they think that that would be a trip reduction and have those conversations so they can come in with their own strategies. And it sounds like there might be an intersection with the active transportation plan, things that have been identified with them or not. Potentially. Anyway, yes. The future also. Okay. And did I miss it as micromobility? It's in there as part of the Yeah. It must be.

Right. So there's bike share membership, and then there's also subsidies that could be provided by a developer, applicant, key tenants, residents, employees for bike share services. So if they wanted to provide them credits, eventually, once you do have micro mobility up and running, the idea is they would be able to use those credits for, you know, a number of rides or, you know, discount passes, things like that.

So for micro mobility, it could be used. Right. Correct.

Like, or scooter share.

Okay. We don't have. So Okay. Those are my questions. I'm I'm so sorry. I'm catching up. Sure. Can we address the letter that we got from DMA? Okay. Okay. So it's difficult when people set it up. 04:45. We have a meeting at six. Just sure we have not seen this. Okay.

Yeah. So that's why I'm bringing it up. Okay. Because I was going back saying that there was a couple other questions that go ahead message. So there the subject is PDM, coordinates, PMA participation, and implementation considerations.

So I think there I'm trying to find whether there's an actual question versus just feedback. If not required through the ordinance, how will consistency with these plans? I think they make the precise plans that were mentioned, you know, North Bay Shore, East West Bennett, San Antonio be achieved? That's one of their questions. So I think some of the comments prior to that question was, they used the words, consider the legal constraint associated with mandating participation in a private organization at the same time with the lack of participation requirements.

So maybe if staff can share what the conversations were with the TMA leading up to the coming to CTC. Apologies. I just thought this Yeah. And I believe have, Natasha on the line, so, he he can jump in.

Yes. Thank you, Allison, and thank you for the question, councilmember Kameh. I can shed some light on the legal the constraints that the city has. Okay. So, historically, the TMA has been funded through individual development agreements with developers who agree to contribute according to the size of their project into the TMA to run the Mountain View shuttle, for instance.

However, turning that into a permanent ordinance for funding would require compliance with prop two eighteen and prop 26. And among the restrictions in both of those propositions is that we would have to make findings for the amount of the levy to match the amount of the benefit received by parcel. In addition, we have constraints on providing funding to private organizations that we have to comply with through state law. So keeping the exact same funding structure in place through a TDM ordinance would constitute an unlawful franchise agreement with the TMA so to avoid that legal issue. It's currently voluntary in the TDM ordinance itself.

However, I am working on a process to make it easier for organizations such as the TMA to create a property based improvement district that could then fund the shuttle.

Thank you. It and I guess that goes back to the the question I asked right before that is kind of what's the engagement been with the TMA? Do they know that? They do. Okay. They are aware. I think there is Different points of view? Yes. Okay. Okay.

And then so the question I will just add, though, that these ordinance will not be retroactive. So anybody that has already had an active TDM will stay in their active TDM. So one of the questions was about consistency with some of the site plan requirements. So that kind of addresses it. Right?

Okay. Okay. So I I think their concern, it sounds like, is just participation. Okay. But I think there was maybe at least, in the council briefing that I had to stop, like, an opportunity if people wanna pop in maybe if council goes in that direction, and that might be a way to help address some of the.

Again, it is a strategy. So they can choose, and there's a lot of benefits from the TMA, like the last mile shuttle. They can help with the reporting. They have there's a lot they can help developers in adapting their TDM. So we think that it still is a good option, especially for some of those developers that are just trying to figure out where to start.

Thanks, Sher. Okay. Thank you. So now we move on to members of the public. Would any member of the public joining us virtually or in person like to provide comments on this item? So you can click the raise hand button in Zoom or And we'll take in person speakers first, and each person will have two minutes. So if anyone, Members of the public. In person. Okay. Are there any members of the public virtually who wish to speak? Yes. David Watson.

Hello. I'm David Watson. You, may have seen that we, we sent a letter. James sent a letter. I wanted to start by, thanking, chair Hicks for raising the parking reduction scaling question.

I'm, glad to hear that that can be addressed administratively. Two more things from our letter I wanted to mention. The limit parking supply credit shouldn't be contingent on adjacent street parking being metered or permitted. A developer does not control on street parking policy. That's the the city's job, and I'm sure you'll hear me back here asking for on street metered or permitted parking, because that's something that I think the city should absolutely be doing.

Another is, please open an enhanced TDM parking exemption pathway for projects under the, 200, ADT threshold. They are, correctly exempt from the ordinance, but, that means that they are they don't have the parking exemption available to them at all. They should be able to, opt in. Also, the toolkit still has a seven core strategies marked as placeholders. It's without them, the residential math for the enhanced TDM tier doesn't quite work. It would be nice if that could be available before the council hearing. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Are there more speakers? Ronnie

Yeah. Hello. Good evening, transportation committee members. Ronnie Hatcher with the Mountain View Transportation Management Association. I apologize for the late receipt of the letter that we sent today.

We had literally just con convened our meeting of the membership and governance committee yesterday evening. So we did our best to turn this letter around as fast as possible. And I think, really, what the purpose of the letter is is to really address the concerns that we have in terms of not requiring participation in the TMA. So our TMA works because it's coordinated broadly and supported broadly without including new and medium large commercial and large residential projects or developments. Efforts risk become disjointed, responsibilities and inconsistency applied, and overall outcomes diminished.

And there are immediate, consequences that we are concerned about. If membership growth is constrained going forward, the TMA will likely need to reduce its services, meaning fewer shuttles, reduced coverage, and less reliable service, pushing commuters and residents back into single occupancy vehicles and increasing traffic congestion. And then one of the considerations I think you had noted there is that consideration should be given for how new development will meet the precise plan requirements in North Bayshore, East Lisbon, and San Antonio where TMA participation is is required and has been promoted through those programs or through those those documents. So we just urge the transportation committee to establish a clear path either through the ordinance or other mechanisms, as Mitesh had stated, the p bed being a a potential option in the future to ensure robust participation by new development. And the timing of this is crucial, and I think that's one of the biggest concerns is we're just now exploring potential conversations of a p bed.

I have not bedded this conversation with our full board, so I did not address that in the letter. But we know these processes do take time, and there's a likelihood that our services might be impacted even just next year if our growth is significantly impacted from a financial perspective. So I appreciate your time and consideration.

Thank you. Are there more speakers? No. That's all. Okay. So now I'm bringing this item back to committee members for their comments.

One, two,

should any of you guys start doing

I don't care. No. Will. Okay. Okay.

Thank you. Can't remember. Well, think I am very excited that we are here at this point where we have a final recommendation, that we'll be able to bring to our colleague household. Feel like, I know that I was sharing this stuff. I know it's been a long two and a half, three year journey, but, really excited to where we are now and, didn't have a lot of questions because I had my council reaching yesterday.

I helped a lot of them. You know, I think one of the biggest things when looking at the ordinance is adopting it, but also allowing for that flexibility that we hear all the time from our development community about, you know, kind of the unpredictability of where, like, our where we are. And I thought it was really helpful. Thank you so much to staff who pulled together the, TDM targets and the case studies so they could share it with us. I thought it was just really helpful to understand the context in which we're operating in.

And, you know, I think the city of San Jose adopted theirs, like, three three years ago or something, four. Yeah. Like, a a while ago. So, it's nice to to know some of the other cities and what they've done in that in that time for us to think about. I appreciate that we can adopt the ordinance, but we can also, look back at how we're monitoring and enforcing.

I thought that, Ms. Pencil had brought up a lot of points, a good point, which is we hear that parking is getting reduced, but we also hear from developers that they need to include it to make it, competitive, and that's what people want. So I think to me, it's really about how we're able to do monitoring. And and I think that's really the the hardest part. With the North Bay Shore, we're very fortunate where we're able to kind of have those three gateway points, and you can, like, count it a lot easier.

But as we're implementing our housing element, I think, and seeing development all across our city, we're not gonna we're just gonna have to on how to do that. But I think adopt that doesn't mean we should adopt the TPM ordinance and the different, you know, core strategies and auxiliary strategies. It just means that it may need to come back to counsel, and that's okay that we the ordinance allows for that. So I think that's all good. I really appreciate the thoughtfulness that staff took into, you know, patron driven uses, but really the, what I call, like, neighborhood surveying uses.

We've been adopting our economic vitality strategy. We've been focusing on that as we've been adopting, our housing element and talking about activation in the different nodes of our city. So really like that. We wanna encourage, that to continue throughout our city. And so those would be I think that's part of the reality we're looking in.

And I I would want I understand and hear what the TMA is saying. I think that the more incentives that we can provide, the more people will voluntarily opt in instead of opt out. And I really like the evolution of where the ordinance have landed because I do think it feels less and more participatory. So I think that that is important. The thing that came up in my briefing that I wanna, like, dig a little bit from my other committee members, I think would be really great is council adopted our master fee special update.

And I think one of the other ways we can when the future council, looks at, revising the master fee schedule, they can include, like, the implementation of the TDM ordinance, the staff time dedicated to that, to do cost recovery. And I think that would be efficient and effective. So I just wanna drop that in right now for my colleague who will be here when that comes back. Think I think that's everything. But I really I'm I'm thrilled and happy that I could move the staff discussion. Thanks.

So

I'm familiar with this from the 2013. So you've been seeing it for four years. I think it's evolved from 2013 when we really had a lot of jobs being created in North Bay Shore. We did have that choke point that we're to reduce the traffic on 85, all the others coming to the areas. And it took some time to get going, So we flash forward to now, and we're we're trying to get something going here.

What I like about the plan is that the enforcement I know it's a bad word, but it's a good because we need to to make this plan work, we need to be able to enforce it. And that's one thing that we never were able really to do with our other, TMA, but we did get a lot of shuttles going through. One thing that we should be looking for is when I was looking at this to be successful and the patrons driving, it's not going out the driveway. So that's exempt. Where are they they're gonna get these TMs to take them to?

It's only pretty much to their job sites that are out because otherwise everything else is exempt. So if North Bayshore is reducing jobs or increasing the housing, gonna be interesting to see how they can get the traffic reduction if the jobs are you know, let's say they're moving to San Jose. So I drive to San Jose. How is that gonna affect miles Sure. Reduction?

So, and a lot of this is contingent from my perspective from doing this for a while is the shuttle services and the bus services, have to be a main component for getting people out of cars. And we're not there. If the current situation is we're not gonna be there all the time. No offense to BTA. They're they're having some issues, and a lot of that stuff is going on. So just, again, what I emphasize is we have to work with TMA on their shuttles in town. We gotta work with BTA in their shuttles. We got Caltrain, BTA Light Rail. Yeah. That's a Light Rail.

It's a whole different story. It's part of the solution. Those are my comments. I will Okay.

Well, lucky luckily for me as chair going last, said almost everything I've written in my notes. Yeah. I'm excited about this too. I think that, you know, it's a fascinating subject we're all to we are also facing, as chair McAllister started to say, really changing times. Knows where jobs are going and also how, you know, automated vehicles might interface with this.

Will they do first and last mile stuff, or will they kill our mass transit, or will they do something else entirely? You know, those that's so principally, one of the big things I like is that this is evergreen given that there's a time of change. And I also thought well, I think the history of it is very, traditional commute, relief congestion, and then it seems like the the, you know, reduce your carbon footprint was added in. Things have been add rightfully added in over time. But I think because of its commute origins, it's very commute oriented.

And as chairman no. I'm the chair. As member McAllister said, yeah, we we are becoming, like, the growing element in town is housing. So and it has all sorts of other restrictions on how we can use this. So this is so we're really gonna have to monitor this.

I don't you know, through nobody's fault, various tools may or may not work the way we originally intended. So I really wanna be open to that, but this is kind of a pilot. Let's see. I really like that the EPC, I think it was the EPC, put in what they call patron driven uses. I think that's a way of making this more as as, member Knei said, it's a way it's a neighborhood can also call them neighborhood serving uses.

And I've heard 70% of trips are, nonacute. I don't know if that's true. I just read it in the web or not. But, anyway, a lot of them are, and they are for the kinds of these kinds of uses, whether it's childcare or, you know, groceries, drugs, etcetera. I really wanna see more of that, and I also wanna see more focus on I think for this plan, we look at mass transit as we should, and and we look at bike lanes and and bike uses, but not so much of walking.

And walking in cities that I've seen that reduce SOV use, walking is a big part of it. So we really so I think we need to interface with the ATP studies I did when I was a planner at Oakland. I will not give you a whole thing, but I was asked to see how far people were willing to walk from the office to a parking garage and read tons of studies. And the answer is,

it depends. The answer

is it depends on what's between the office and the parking garage. And there are all sorts of elements that I want, you know, tell you about. But one of them is, like, do people enjoy the walk? Because they will purposely park far away and get in their daily steps. So I really think we cannot discount that and make, you know, make our city into, how do I say it, a horrible place to walk and then expect people to walk.

People who walk it doesn't have to be a parking garage or down the path. How far will they walk? Farther if they enjoy it than if they hate the walk. So I wanna in the future, want more on green infrastructure. I want more on, call them, patron driven uses.

I agree with what our Yimbi letter said about not having metering everywhere, that regulation, you know, the, whatever it's called, our PPP program is open enough. I agree with member McAllister that we have to pair this with mass transit and see that as a changing thing, something we can interact with to make it work better for us, maybe. And when we say safe routes to school, always want the word scooter in there because I think most grade school children scoot, not just roll because that's what that means besides us. And and I think I like membership, being voluntary, and I think that is all of my

that's all

of my notes. I got

a question.

Oh, sure. When does the Presidential Park I don't know that answer, but we can find out. Okay? Okay. So with that, any last thoughts? Do we have some did somebody make a motion? And you seconded? Okay. All those in favor? Passes unanimous.

Thank you so much.

Place orders will be updated with. Okay, Christine. They're more click click on that on the. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Like, in the tool in the Yeah. The toolkit. Yeah. I'm just very accelerated. Alright. There you go. But yep. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Appreciate it.

Yes.

Yeah. I'm gonna say we're gonna while, our staff is setting up, we're going to take a five minute break, and we'll be back at 07:10.

You set up pretty much.

07:08. No. We are now moving on to I'm gonna start the meeting again, moving on to item 5.2, which is the Middlefield Road Complete Streets project twenty two dash zero one. The staff presentation will be provided by Home Union. I hope I pronounced that pretty well. Tell me later. Associate civil engineer. So staff. Good

evening, community members. My name is. Associate civil engineer with Cboe Infrastructure. Here with me tonight is Robert Gonzales, principal civil engineer, and Adam here from CFP Engineering. Adam will be joining us remotely.

We're here today to present the design concept for Middle Field Of The street. Project location is on Middle Field between more. As I like I like it in the red dot line. Middle Field Overpass, Stephen Creek's trial, and conference day Route 85 between and Easy Street. Across the between Alice of under cost coverage table of two thirty seven near.

All improvements were submitted at background application as shown on the left, including roadway resurfacing from to Westmont, plus four protected byways between and. That's due by lanes of 5885. The entry and bicycle improvement at four Intersection, Morpe, Bolivar, ECP, Tarela, and Goodman's Road. Because the city received new grants for Middle Field, which will be discussed in next slide, new scope was added to the project as shown on the right. So roadway is resurfacing entire corridor, new pedestrian hybrid signal at that level, pedestrian bicycle improvements for all intersection along the corridor.

So this slide show the timeline this project had taken so far. In June 2022, feedback was presented to checklist for the OPEC three grant application. In January 2023, the city were awarded $2.48 to the OPEC green grant. Staff went to the council in February 2023 to secure the grant. In May 2024, city council authorized personal services agreement with CFREE for design services and construction support.

Design will kick up in fall two thousand twenty four. Since they received two additional grants for me to pay, the first one is the housing incentive program received in June 2025 in the amount $1,760,000. And then in December 2025, Steve was awarded $5,170,000 to the affordable housing stability initiatives program. The OPACP grant is a federal grant that comes with certain requirements, including coordination with California Department of Transportation, which is also the OPEC administering authority. Did they commit to deliver the project scope indicated in the grant application within the grant funding timeline.

Fund funding must be obligated by January 2027. Additional funds received from the housing incentive pool and the affordable housing sustainability communities, grants will have the city funded at this. It is important to the city to invest in Middle Field because it is one of the city's regional corridor.

We

want to highlight that Middle Field is what the only East West regional corridor in the city network to directly connect the adjacent cities of Sunnyvale and Palo Alto. Vision zero action plan and local safety plan identified Middle Field as part of the high local high injury network. The Accent MB comprehensive model plan identified Middle Field as a high Stress facility with bicycle level of traffic stress three out of four and a tier two priority corridor for transportation improvement project proposing class four separate byways. Proposed improvements on Middle Field are part of draft active transportation plan. So the map show major corridor in orange, Corridors that have recently received or are planned to receive road dials are highlighted in green.

That also invented in the mounting a road dial or middle field. What does US staff consider road map include roadway classification, overall roadway network, average daily trips, safety, emergency response, transit access, and operational impacts. In March 2025, the BPAC provided comments on the Moffitt Public Street project requesting consideration of a rod diet. Therefore, staff evaluated the middle feed corridor for a potential rod diet from two length to one length in duration and would like to share a summary of the results. The scenarios analyzed were different conditions, background conditions, and cumulative condition.

The criteria used to evaluate the scenarios are roadway capacity, level of service, analysis. Hourly traffic volumes were evaluated against roadway hourly capacity to identify roadway capacity efficiencies. With road diet, middle field would experience overcapacity condition as indicated in the table. The left column show corridor divided into three segments. The first segment is between and.

So with in in implements the. This segment would experience over as the for one hour during even at peak hours under incident and background condition. Two hour during more than peak hours and three hour during evening peak hours under accumulated conditions. The top row show roadway capacity on the segment between Wissman and 23237. And the last row show the railway capacity on the remaining segment between two to 02:37 and distance.

Level of servers is a letter based weighted thumb measuring the operation condition of an intersection with a representing best free flow conditions and f representing what jet condition. As shown on the map, with implemented, five intersection circle will experience a degree level of service to e or f. Levels level of service analysis, they are still a common practice for operational analysis of local intersection. Vehicle miles traveled has been brought up. However, it is used more in a traffic analysis context.

Given

analysis evaluates vehicles stacking on left at at at intersection. The road diode would cause substantial QN deficiency at, therefore, intersection along the corridor. And to resolve the QN deficiency, exit the lateral length would need to be length. So in this slide, as one example, I can show how much the left hand lane need to be lengthened at the intersection if implementing the rod. The eastbound direction, the left hand leg would need to be extended 200 feet, which would require a median reconstruction and remove approximately 50 degrees.

On the westbound, the left hand lane would need to be extended 400 feet, and it is not feasible due to extensive change in roadway geometry. Additional location on the corridor include at Ely Street, Boisman, Block Avenue, and State Route 2 37th. Knock knock. In summary, the study concluded a road that would result in deficiency of the intersections level of service, increase intersection vehicle queuing, and reduce point of capacity. Additionally, implementing the road that would cause the loss of capacity, which will impact the operation of all the East West arterials and emergency response time for medical, police, and fire services.

Only of all reasons, staff does not recommend implementing a bronchial for me to fill. Over the next slides, Robert will walk you through segment by segment shown in the performance and cross section along the.

Thank you, Wah. So the existing corridor conditions can be split into two distinct segments. Segment a for Moffett to Woodsmen and segment b for Woodsmen to Bernard. Segment a, excluding the segment over State Route 85, comprises mostly multifamily homes, two travel lanes in each direction, class two bike lanes on both sides, which becomes parking lanes on weekends and after 7PM on weekdays. Feedback received we received from the VPAC last week included advancing the parking removal now or as soon as possible rather than waiting for design approval.

This would require con consideration from the We'll talk about more of that feedback section. To implement a full time platform bike facility on street parking will need to be removed at all times. In addition to further elements, green bike lane striping on the right on the right there will be added to conflict zones such as driveways and bus stops. Within this segment, the State Route 85 Overpass is approximately 1,000 feet long. It's shown here on the right and spans across State Route 85.

There is a center median, two travel lanes, and a class two bike lane in each direction. No sidewalk on the southbound side. Staff evaluated closing the sidewalk gap along the south side the bridge over State Route Or 85, including the feasibility of converting the existing bike lane to a shared multiuse path for eastbound bicyclists and pedestrians. Stack met with California Department of Transportation, Caltrans, which owns the bridge. Caltrans staff confirmed alterations to the overpass, including but not not limited to modifying and adjusting language will require a comprehensive review of the approval process, which would cause the project to miss the o back three final grant deadlines.

Therefore, staff will pursue designing design of a multipurpose path as a separate project. This separate project will be proposed for additional design and construction funding in the next fiscal year. For the current project, the proposed layout of the bridge overpass will be somewhat today's existing condition as shown. The top diagram here is the existing condition, and the one on the bottom is the proposed section. So the next segment, segment b, is the Woodsmen Road to Bernardo.

This segment comprises mostly commercial buildings, two travel lanes, and a full time class two bike lane in each direction. Left turn lanes and center landscaping median. This segment crosses the BTA light rail near near Logan Avenue and runs underneath State Route 237 with on ramp and off ramp entrances. A new crosswalk at the VTA light rail crossing to connect to the existing multiuse path was considered as a project element. This project will require CPUC approval and VTA coordination due to proximity to VTA traps.

Given this context, it will be addressed in this type of question. Similar to segment improvements include class four bike facilities with buffers and vertical delineators to provide separate between bike lanes and travel lanes. In addition to vertical elements, green bike lane driving will be added at conflict zones such as driveways and bus stops. Typical intersection improvements include high visibility crosswalks, advanced stop bars, accessible pedestrian signals, ADA compliant curb ramp upgrades. And I note here I have the directional curb ramps design will be evaluated evaluated more feasible.

The diagram we show here shows ADA curb ramps that kinda point it to the middle of the intersection. Design standard is to provide directional curb ramps where practical and feasible. Oh, I'm looking at training. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Stop share the concept design. Forwarded for you at last week on April 29 and receive the following recommendations. First one, remove and convert this existing to full time ahead of project design completion. It is feasible, but it will require formal notice in the incident council approval Considering available staffing backlog in both transport transportation plan and street maintenance, delivery will be towards the end 2026. Second one, the second feedback is implementing road map on middle field.

It's not recommended by this the road map study. Also, implementing Rota would require the project redesign. It would cause the city to miss the old factory fund in application deadline of January 2027 and potentially and we'll lose the. The third one is considered including protect protection design. Middle field is a route and intersect with truck routes including.

And that will require wider that will require wider. Protected intersection is not recommended due to the need to acquire this new right of way and reconstruct the intersections, which will have substantial impact on the project cost schedule. The next step is to close the sidewalk gap on the south side of the state run and fire for pass. Not feasible to be included as part of this project due to the extensive coverage permitting review and approval process. However, it would be evaluated by a future project, which will be a proposal for funding in the next fiscal year.

And last, in fact, is consider 10 or 10 half foot wide vehicle lens. Ten ten or 10 half foot wide lens with anosity standards. City follows NACTO recommendation with 11 foot land based on the type of roadway middle fifties at transit corridor. The staff will incorporate feedback and feedback and proceed with the design. Will will assist with initiating the design coordination with CoucheX.

Subject to CoucheX approval, we anticipate the design completion by 2026 and with construction in summer two thousand twenty seven. Okay. K.

So we have right. That's the entire presentation, Madison? Yes. So, now it's time for committee member questions. So I had a question about when we move from PLATH to Biplase to Bospholipid, do we see a or do they tend to stay the same? Do we not want?

This is usually situation by situation. So if the corridor stays the same, we're not changing anything. If you're taking lane width away from travel lanes, say exist an existing travel lane, 14 feet, it's, like, very generous. You will see a lot of speeding in in in those lanes. So if you take that and put three or four feet into a buffer, you've got the last four bike lane. You've got a buffer, and you've got a narrower driving lane. So in those in those situations, the driver feels like they have a little more restriction, so the natural tendency is to slow down.

K. So I think, one, know, another issue in addition to the funding is just, like, the volumes, which we're seeing people use their vehicles a lot. Don't feel that I agree with that correctly. It sounds like we have literally thousand almost 2,000 vehicles.

Yeah. That's that's correct.

Yes. Right.

Okay. And if we went to the roadside, it would go down if we cut it in half. Is that what I I just wanna make I read everything.

Yeah. The capacity of the road would go down.

Okay. And right now to be I'm so sorry to think of these questions prior. So how many feet is middle field now, like, two two point feet?

Widths of the two lines.

Does it as if we reduce with the. I'm just wondering if that makes.

You gotta do some math for us and figure out if we can squeeze it.

That's why I leave it to the professional, but I that was just one other thing.

Yeah. So segment b showed the existing two travel aids on the top. So the widths vary, but it's about eleven and eleven, so that's about 22 feet.

Each lane.

On on the direction and then, yes, each lane. And then oh, excuse me. 22 feet total, eleven and eleven, and then twelve and eleven in the other direction. So if you do a little bit of math on the bottom, we propose giving some of that to a buffer area about three feet, and then the existing bike lane going from about eight feet down to about six feet. So taking some of the area from the bike lane and putting it into the buffer. But each of the lanes would be reduced down to the city standard about 11 feet. Okay.

Another question. So I think we council had looked at this project originally as, like, one project. But as a result, it sounds like there may be three projects coming out of it, which is this project, which you can use the funding, the segment over 85, and then the, basically, the the VTA CPUC part. And we TBD on, when those two new project segments would be determined. That would come back to counsel as part of the

Or as a midyear

Hi.

Hi. Good evening. Ed Arango, assistant director. Thank you for your question. So as far as timing, I can give you approximate timing based on we're expecting to do so. So we're hoping to do a bid here for the we understand the importance

of thinking about those projects.

Providing another access point on the Correct. So

we're looking to get this through design, which is we expect to be done at the end of this year. And come to counsel at that time for a new big year capital project to fund to get funded, and then we can proceed with that. And then as far as the This slide. Yeah. The crossing at the black rail tracks, we had discussed, you know, timing, but we we can evaluate that as part of that project or separate. We we need that. We'll come back to you.

Okay. Great. Thank you. Okay.

Oh, I

had other questions about it. We'll trigger your we'll trigger your questions again. No. No. Retrigger my mind. Yeah. Because I started thinking about that.

So I've submitted a few questions, and I I appreciate everybody's patience. You have A lot of you have been looking at this since 2022, so I'm coming in with this with fresh eyes and not hearing a lot of the background. So when I asked a lot of questions was to just give me some background information to get a sense of what's going. And so every time I look at bike lanes, always ask what what's and I listened to EPC, and I didn't hear one person ask about how many people are asking about BIPET. Why do I think B Pit?

Where you ask about people riding on the plane, and they came back with some information from 2018. Has there been any data collected or county traffic counts since 2018 for bike riders on this road?

Not to my knowledge. So the transportation planning is usually responsible for the transportation evaluation parts of this. Projects that are identified as priorities come out of planning studies, like mission zero and access and in the future, active transportation plan. Those projects are identified as priorities and then they're both delivery. So as part of those studies, they identified this I think the high priority collision network high injury network was identified as well as the the performance of the the the program in terms of Stratz. So That's sort of

got me my next question.

I think

you answered it. Ridership is not a criteria. These other items are criteria for what's been out. That's right. And I asked another question that was these answers are great, and I appreciate your staff. Whoever did it, they were hopefully, they were straightforward questions that someone could bang it up. So short time you guys did that. I appreciate who oh, you and your whole department getting. So really nice. I had another question.

It says scope of the o bag three granted. And I asked one of the questions with was the upgrade on Black Lane slash. And the response was the upgrade was included, and it didn't really answer the question. So was there an option, or is that part of the criteria of other things that the class four? So

we proposed class four as part of our application, and the obey criteria scores the applications based on the element the project elements and the benefits to that. So they saw the class fours, and they gave it a score. That's how we were.

K.

No. You guys answered that. I mean, I have some comments going forward, but well, let me ask you this. They're easy. There wasn't a response. You sent out 1,700 postcards, and I asked what was the expected turnout. I just noticed there was 20 responses and eight people in person. So 1,700, we got 28 responses. That's

I couldn't give you an answer. No. Okay. I know. Can't really give you a good answer now in terms of return. So if I was a surveyor, you know, pollster, I would have that information.

I was just

I'll I'll

bring that up in comments. Okay. Those were another thing. So no. That's it. You did a good job.

There are a lot of questions. Very good answers. Good questions. Did that trigger your question? No. Okay. Well, I'll ask I'll ask a few and see if. So can you tell me a little more? Because many members of the I'm gonna ask mostly questions to members of the public fast way. So I see you reducing lanes from 11 and a half to 12 to 11 feet.

And then people have said that also sometimes 10 feet people claim it's been used on El Camino Real and I'm double checking to see if they're right. And then I think in the presentation you just gave, you said we're not doing that because a corridor of this type, we don't go down lower than 11. But it also later in the it says we'll review that during design standard review. So can you just give me a little more information on when you go down to 10? I like that you comment.

But I like that you're steadily adding them to the buffer, and maybe someday they go down further, the buffer will become something else. But but, yeah, can you tell me a little more about what you think about 10 feet in various places and why you choose?

Sure. So let's let's

start with Alameda Ria. So that's a major corridor, lots of lots of different types of traffic. And my understanding from from the Caltrans design was it was designed for most of the quarter, one eleven lane, and a ten ten and a half foot lane. So 11 foot lane is closest to the curve. That's where all the buses are. 10 and a half foot is right next to it. On pinch points, there probably are areas that that 10 and a half might have had to go lower, but that's how it was designed. So the feedback that we've got from our traffic team is that that could be very, very challenging on, basically, the AVODUS truck.

You mean

on middle?

Well, in terms of feedback of

mean that wall. Okay.

The the 10 and a

half foot lane on El Camino now can be a challenge. When you have a box truck next to the next to the bus, it feels like a very, very tight corridor. Most people navigate it. I don't know if there's been an uptick uptick in collisions, but that's been the feedback. So the feedback from that is we want the city standard to be 11.

The second half of your question regarding the design standard is that that is a project that everyone like council was very enthusiastic about. Heard that last month. So as part of that, we're looking at and and codifying the the the widths of the the streets based on type of streets. So arterials, corridors, residential areas with a lot of transit will get different lane treatments. Okay.

Thank you. I have a much better understanding now. There's it is that way at pinch points on El Camino. There may be problems you're evaluating and

Okay. And

then, so Deepak said, could you advance could you, do the parking removal ahead of the project is the answer is the answer yes to that or maybe?

So the answer is yes. I think we put a couple caveats there because our transportation planning is reduced staff. Our street may not be. Backlog, particular work backlog. So we kinda put that in terms of, like, yes. We can do it, but the expectation would be would be immediate.

That's Yes. According to your staff. So you got there.

Hi. Again, Ed Arango. I just wanna reinforce what mentioned. It really is staff resources. We have a lot of fun. We're trying

to get through the

the efforts. We're very diligent. We're being very aggressive in our our our process delivery process. And this effort requires us to notify all the residents, make sure that there's adequate time, and then there's an ordinance that does need to get us in conflict with us as well to officially remove the. We're supportive of it as, of course, it is very in line with the project. It just requires staff resources towards the end

of this calendar year. Okay.

Thank you. So on staff resource. And then I'm going to ask a couple of questions that a bunch of members of the public wrote a group letter, and I'm going to ask some questions from there. One question they asked was, can you evaluate a middle fee I got these. I'm just understanding them now.

Maybe you've read them. Can you evaluate a middle field road diet as part of the current resurfacing project? That seems that's the question. Just like Sure. How do how does the city approach looking at everything? That might be helpful. Okay. Can is that okay? Yeah. I love questions that piggyback. Well, because it's not just I think it's just not just the middle field, but it's like we were to, like, look at another variation. So I just wanna understand that process.

Yeah. So there's a there's a there's a couple of things that happen. But during the planning process, during the access MB or the transportation plan or other areas other planning projects, planning exercises such as that, they will look at the quarter use. They will look at the physical constraints of the quarter, the curve to curve with and they'll look at current uses, see where the bike tree and activity is now, and then they'll recommend corridors for evaluation. So they kinda just look at the demand side first.

And then from there, the next trigger is really a a traffic demand study to really evaluate what kind of how it's used now in terms of. So we've we've done that now with I think the example where it's in front of us with middle field is a really good one. It it has looked at the road capacity, the queuing impacts, and the level of service. Thank you for the for the different intersections. So that's typically what we'll do is we'll bring on a a traffic consultant to evaluate those, you know, modeling results after we've identified a quarter that's a good candidate for at least looking at a broad diet.

So going back to your question, can can we do an evaluation of a broad diet for Middlefield? Is that the question?

Yes. I think that's what want. So I'm not sure. The answer is yes.

The answer is here we are. So if there's other like, if there's questions specific to the to the study, I'm happy to

answer them. Yeah. I thought that these were. Let's see. These seem to be more comments on things. So if they are more questions, then questions. Later. Okay. So those are my questions. Are there any other questions that are triggered? Okay. Then we will move on now to, public comment on this item. If you are here in person to make a comment, please, come to go back to

your online.

Yeah.

Hi.

I'm Valerie Fennig. I am a member of the Performing Arts Committee. I'm not speaking for that committee. I'm not speaking for my employer either. Former member of BPAC. My familiar faces here. I I I bike, walk, commute, and drive on this corridor. Lots of cyclists that that right now, the part time parking is a real problem because particularly as it gets dark, it particularly as it gets dark, people just start parking there in the winter. It makes it very dangerous, particularly in the rain. Incredibly dangerous.

It's a regular part of my when I am able to commute by bicycle, typically able, that is part of my regular commute. I heard that one segment at pass would be at capacity with a road diet. Why wasn't that considered? Queuing, could that be handled with signal changes? What other things could we do that maybe isn't a full road diet of removing a lane, but instead making lanes narrower where it is safe to do so. I live on one Mountain View's famous narrow streets. Fire engines still get down there. Trucks. We haven't bought big giant pit. That's a separate topic where somebody's dug out their entire plot of their house, but, they got the land movers in.

No problem. I noticed the level of service presented here was only for cars. I bike. I ride. I drive this segment almost every day. Area. I also bike, ride, and walk on California Avenue and love the road diet on there. Love it. The residents are starting to really love that as well. There's a lot of residents here.

Highway 85 Overpass, people are using both sides of that bridge. You can see the dirt, where there's no grass growing because people walk there. It is also near the dollar store there, in that segment, which is a very popular stop for a lot of families where they get out there. It is the local store. But I would also like to urge the CTC, thank you for serving here today, but also to consider a reduced speed limit, more urgently and removing that part time parking.

Palo Alto has reduced their speed limit on Biddlefield to 25 miles per hour. I drive that, several times a week, and it used and I put my bike on it. Used to be people went 45, 50 miles per hour, now they go thirty, thirty five. So, you know, it's not 25, but it is slower and safer. Thank you.

So you mentioned that

it would

be that, middle field would be at capacity or fairly congested if road dye were being implemented. Would that like, if there was congestion, would people that bike, or would they go to other roads, or how would that work?

Hello. My name is hello, committee, Council of Transit Committee. My name is Greg Colodonato. My house is at the corner of Leslie Court and Middlefield. I've lived on the corridor for sixteen years. One of my bedroom windows looks at Middlefield, and the other one had glorious view of the Dollar Tree. Okay. As we saw in mister Nguyen's sixth slide, it's strange but true, but Middlefield is the only way you can get from one side of Mountain View to the other east to west on one road. None of the other roads go through. That in itself to me is a reason to upgrade this bike path this bike lane from class two to class four so that you can get through the city on a road. I am a cyclist myself,

and I often use metal field.

I'd like to address mister I meeting member McAllister's concerns. The traffic count on this road is not very high, but that's because biking and that bike lane sucks. So, like, you can't just use the count and say no one uses it because it's dangerous to use this lane because there's always cars parked in it and always people popping out of driveways. So you're not gonna know the actual natural traffic level in that bike lane until normal people feel safe biking in it. So, I mean, I get that the and by the way, you should count more than every year.

So, like, if the last count was 2018, we should update that for sure. But I think that you'll see a lot more traffic in this lane when it's safe to be in. There's I I think that you should probably go to full time bike lanes when you can, staff resources permitting. I also think that a road diet would be good, although it doesn't seem consistent with the fund the deadlines for this project. So maybe later, do a road dive because there are a lot of drag racers on Middle Field, and I, I know this because they comes right in my window when I'm sleeping.

Okay. I'd also like to point out that if the bus lanes if the buses park in the bike lane, that makes this lane a lot less appealing. You have to go around the bus lane around the bus, which is not safe. Maybe put the bus stops on the right lane. Thank you.

Are there more in person speakers? Go to the virtual speakers. Bruce England.

Thank you. I I just wanna mention really quickly that the audio is pretty poor, particularly for Ellen and also for Allison. Might be your distance from the microphone for the system, but kinda hard to hear everything you're saying. Okay. See what I can get into this amount of time.

April Webster's letter is key to the things that we've been talking about out here. And so I won't repeat what show what she said. There's a lot in there to consider. But the the ATP work out of transportation plan should be playing to this project as much as possible is one comment. We hear VMT and levels of service, but we're interested in seeing VMT emphasized for application to this project and any project like this really.

Multi mode is the direction for active transportation, and all of our projects in the city should reflect that. The most important comment from me that you might not hear from anybody else tonight is about the abrupt curb at the north end of the path between Wisbon Station going past Pyramid Park and Middlefield. The East West projects will expand the amount of connectivity from those using the path today, including to access the park and the adjacent light rail stations. So Google was going to fix that. They had plans for it so the city could, I believe, just leverage what Google's already put together in order to make that happen.

Really quickly with the time I have left, lane width reductions and green complete streets are important. All of the BPAC input from their meeting, including community comment, very important, very detailed, and hope that you will take that into account as much as you can. What jumps out to me is that the definition of the project probably should have been fleshed out earlier because we're seeing the limitations and risks of compromising the funding, and we don't want that to happen. And then no. I think I'm out of time. Okay. Thanks.

Thank you. Are there more virtual speakers? Sylvia Paymer.

Hi. I also second everything in April's letter from that include green spaces. Sorry. Silly Paymer, resident of Mountain View, number of green spaces. I also just wanted to add on a few things I noticed during the meeting today.

I was sort of surprised to hear that there was somehow a road diet would make it necessary to increase pavement space. Seems like if we're going to a road diet, one of the lanes could become a left hand turn lane as necessary. And then I do wanna hear more about the timeline and if it's possible to get an extension so that we can get better results because, you know, the we don't do these very often, and we're putting a lot of money into it. And so it should be what we want. I don't wanna delay, obviously.

But if it's something that we can maintain the majority of the timeline and get, you know, a 100% better results, that would be great. I sorry. I lost my notes. I do wanna say, like, I would like to see some more kind of quick build options so that we could get stuff in. And then maybe if the geometry is not quite right, it could be adjusted.

I do see on El Camino that we've seen the traffic slow down and the buses do still fit. And so it would be nice to either narrow streets or if we went to a road diet, then we wouldn't need to narrow the lane and everyone would still fit. So that seems like a good option. I do think it's ironic that we spent the first half of this meeting talking about how we would encourage private developers to encourage mode shift, and then now we're not following suit. So I I do think we should kind of do what we preach and look for that mode shift and try to reduce vehicle miles traveled and increase our active transportation. Thank you.

Thank you. There are large speakers. Mary Daniel.

Large section of middle will have protected bike lanes and parking removed. We were just reminded

Mary, your voice is spotty. Maybe you can start over again. Can you start over two minutes? Okay. Start over again now and see if we can hear you.

Bad interaction. Yes. Hi. Can you hear me now? Try again. Your voice is a little spotty, but maybe we'll bear with it. Mary, are you there? Yes. Okay. Can you start?

Oh, I changed my still

not working. Okay. Maybe we can come back to you, Mary. Is there someone else? Give Mary some time.

April Webster. April. Thanks. Can you hear me?

Yes. Perfect. So I was really wanting to talk about moving forward in a process and how do we, you know, the implement

Be a little louder.

Can you hear me? I'm talk I'm yelling. Can you hear me?

Okay. Keep yelling.

Can you restart my time? Sure. Thank you. There's been some issues with the sound recently. Okay. I'm ready. Can you hear me? Yes. Okay. I just wanna start saying I was I'm really disappointed about not being able to focus on what I wanted to tonight in my comments, and that's implementation and how we move from policy and plans into delivery.

But I'd instead, find myself needing to focus on a few claims I've heard tonight. First, staff continuing this that continuing to evaluate a road diet could require design a redesign and jeopardize a project timeline. That raises a really important question. Why was the either a nonroad a road diet design advanced at the same time while the traffic analysis was underway? We only did the nonroad diet design.

Traffic analysis is really only useful if you do it earlier enough to actually shape the project. If it happens if only one design direction is advanced, then the public input and even the analysis really doesn't have ability to affect the outcome, which then, you know, talking about that whole process and also on grant timing. I wanted to jump onto that. Sorry. I don't think we should assume the OBAG three deadline prevents design changes without until we confirm with MTC, VT, and Caltrans.

I work with MTC on one of their committees, and I spoke with them back in March 2025. They told me the OBAC three deadline should not prevent the city from reevaluating or and or modifying the project design to address public input. We should check and see if that flexibility still applies. It's a year later, but we knew a over about a year ago, and staff was added to that thread in June. Then in terms of NACTO, I'm reading from the urban bikeway design guide on the designing protected bike lanes chapter.

It says motor vehicle lanes should be narrowed to support the widest feasible bike lanes. At posted speeds of 35 miles per hour or less, general purposes travel lanes can be 10 foot wide and still support transit and truck uses. Where transit or heavy trucks are rare, a travel lane of nine feet is an is acceptable width for a general purpose travel Lane.

Okay. So now the time is up. Thank you. K. Next.

Cliff Chambers. Hey, Cliff.

Hi. Cliff Chambers, resident of Mountain View. I just wanna reiterate a few things that have been said in both April's letter and James Cozumel had wrote a very thoughtful and great letter, and I hope you've all read it. First off, with the OBAG deadline, professionally, I did a lot of work in contracts with MTC, and they regular regularly extended contracts, changed it. If there's community input, they make changes.

So please look into that. And if you if staff hasn't asked them, I hope that staff asks staff to check with MTC to make sure that it is indeed a constraint. I think the whole corridor needs to be thought of because the it it is a whole corridor in the draft ATP plan, class four along all of Middle Field Road. One of the things that does the the whole discussion of the road diet focuses on all the constraints and it doesn't talk about the benefits, the safety benefits, the reductions of speed. That is why we did the California Street because of a fatal accident.

There are a lot of benefits of road diets that are not covered in in the staff report. I am all for along the entire corridor having full time bike lanes in the interim before it even goes to class four. It's extremely dangerous. If you go out on Crittenton Middle School, students learn how to ride the bikes in the on those lanes. And then on the weekends, they have to cut into the main traffic lanes. It's dangerous. Somebody's gonna get killed. There's somebody mentioned earlier that Middle Field is a drag streak. It's true. I live right on Middle Field.

People oftentimes go fifty, fifty five miles an hour between, Rankstorf and Old Middlefield. We need to reduce the speeds. We need to reduce the speed limit. If we can't have a road diet, we need to think about speed limits. Thank you.

Thank you. Jesse? Jesse? You're out.

Hey. Thank you.

Jesse? Oh,

hey. Can you hear me now?

Yes.

Okay. Great. So I bike on this road, and, I just wanna agree with everyone else who's been saying it's it's a dangerous road to bike on, particularly when, people are parking in the bike lane all the time when they're not supposed to be. So that that's an easy fix to make that bike lane permanent. I support narrowing the lanes, reducing the speed limit, having a permanent protected bike lane, all that good stuff.

And it's just a little disappointed to hear that the vehicle miles traveled is apparently given so much weight, and it's kinda like the end all be all. And, yeah, it'll be more more congested if we do a road diet. But do we know how many people are gonna switch to biking, how many more people will walk on the street, and how much safer it's gonna be? I really think human life should come first over, you know, some congestion, and people will reroute to other roads as well. So I know we've had, some really great protected bike lanes put in on El Camino Real and on California Street.

And I'm wondering, has the city done a full before and after to see, you know, how much bicycle and pedestrian activity goes up after those changes? Because I've seen it. I know it's a significant increase, but I don't know if it's you know, are people writing their bikes a 100% more or 200% more? Do we have the count? And could that be used as kind of a an estimate to say, like, oh, yeah.

We're going to through the road diet or through, you know, whatever measures we take, fewer people will end up driving here, but we can expect approximately, you know, this much of an increase in people walking and biking and and using active transportation. So I really think that should be kind of the standard is to consider the the benefits, not just the downsides to road diets.

Thank you.

Thank you. Mary, did you? Mary, you're up again.

Hope this works better. Oh, sounds better. Okay. So I am happy to see about the more protected bike lanes and that parking is gonna be removed. But we're just reminded that Middlefield's a high injury network.

And I think we all realize that a lot of people drive much faster and that this endangers all members of the public, including the drivers, cyclists, walkers. So if we sent officers out all the time to enforce it, that would be expensive. There's a much lower cost method that we've been hearing, that reliably reduces speeding, and that's to narrow the lane width. So that would be a permanent corrective action that could be implemented with without too much cost via paint. Caltrans has demonstrated on ECR that 10 and a half foot wide lanes are workable.

I would suggest that the primary questions to ask about the 10 and a half foot wide lanes on El Camino, are not is not the question is not whether box trucks feel crowded next to buses, but instead whether speeding's been reduced and whether the total number of accidents and the severity of accidents have been reduced on El Camino. So I think one lane, on each side of the road in in the new design should be reduced at least to 10 and a half or 10 feet to encourage vehicles to drive at the speed limit and to create more space for bike lanes. I think more bike lane space is gonna bike lane space is gonna grow in importance as more bikes and especially ebikes start using these lanes because bikes are gonna need to be able to pass each other. They're gonna need space for passing. Also, I think a road diet should be considered at least for the overpass on the street in Palo Alto reduces down to one lane, and traffic moves along just fine there.

So I think a road diet, as you're approaching and leaving the overpass is perfectly reasonable to, to consider. Thank you.

Thank you. Alright. That's one more. One more virtual. One more virtual, and then we'll take one away. Tracy?

Yes. Can you hear me now?

Yes.

Sorry. Of course, now my dogs are gonna bark because I heard you. I just wanted to say that I support the letter, by April and the comments by the public. I do live, on Farley Street, which is right off of Middlefield. I could be going up and down Middlefield on my bike, but I do not feel safe enough to do it. So I definitely support a road diet. I even my grandson, works over in Charleston Plaza, his little after school job, and I basically have to drive him there. One time I was busy, and I was like, can't you ride your bike? It's not very far. And he's like, he rode it, and he's like, I'm never doing that again.

So and I can't ask him. Then I paid more attention to it even. I I really can't ask him to do that. So we're doing extra trips up and down Middlefield. I would love it if it extended further. I know it's not part of this project, but I just wanna say that I do support having safer bike lanes. When I lived in Palo Alto, that was one of the things I did love, that Bryant Street is really a place where I can go up and down the city without really a lot of worries about cars. But here in Mountain View, I don't have as many. I I really appreciate that you're thinking and planning towards it, and, thank you.

Thank you. There are no more virtual speakers. Is that true? Just no more. I think this is our last in person speaker. I'm Grule Lehman.

I'm, and I I think one thing is if if we could consider the question around the road diet, a way to think about it might be what are the alternatives that car commuters have, and what are the alternatives that bike and pedestrian commuters have. Right now, car commuters have Central Expressway, and they also have one zero one not far from a car perspective. Bicyclists, as, you know, mentioned by this other cyclist, don't have another alternative for going this direction in a safe way. So if we're gonna, like, look at this question around because I think there was a question of saying, like, if we do a road diet, we're commuting for volume. But that might just move that volume to the Central Expressway or to one on one, which are most reasonable, I think, commuting options for people trying to go any kind of a distance.

Bikes don't have any kind of option. And on the pedestrian piece, I would love you guys to think about that overpass. I know there was a question around timing, but, you know, if folks look at the situation right now, Stevens Creek is a very common walking and biking path, and it empties out where there is no pedestrian overpass option, Olds Creek eighty five. And there's even no good way to cross field anywhere near there, and so we are seeing people walking on a very unsafe portion of Middle Field there. So I think, like, that's something to just bring back is make sure that the pedestrian option there for being able to cross over 85 is a solid option given how well it connects up with other fantastic pedestrian options.

You.

So last check. I think we're done with with speakers. Do you see any more? So questions and the questions that have come up and comments. Think we're so sorry. Okay. So, one of the things that came up was this street plea green green street checklist and if that would be possible for future projects. Did that happen? I don't

know if I saw that question before,

but Okay. Yes. So came in as part of the letter. Okay. I think that I think that is the question. So

for projects that are funded regionally, as our measure b for projects that complete checklist is re a requirement of VTA. So that was actually filled out in 2022 when we applied for the grant, and that went through the VPAC process for the VPAC Mhmm. At that time. So all projects going forward would do that same same effort at the time of their kind of initiative.

Whether they're regional or not?

Actually, all projects with regional funding will go through that. Typically, our larger projects, larger corridors are the ones for regional. So California Montee or this one, smaller projects like a resurfacing would not be subject to this because we don't usually go about street maintenance, you know, residential streets. So we we we are in compliance with the with the Complete Streets policy and going forward if if there are updates. One part of the question is that the complete streets checklist today looks different than it did in 2022 because it's frequently updated.

Yep.

Start back. And Yeah.

Durango, just to follow-up, mister Gonzales very well comprehensively addressed that. I think sort of reading between the lines a little bit is do we apply this to all projects? Yes. I think that was I think that's where you're gonna get into. So to answer your question on that, it depends on the type of project. When we're identifying a complete street project, it does make sense to apply it. So I know that we have the next one that we're looking at, which is Franksthorf, so that we would apply it there. But it it is implied to every single project as it depends on the scope that we're doing. Sometimes we're not doing an integral part. We're just doing a portion.

We may be just doing just general maintenance. But if we are have identified a corridor that it absolutely makes sense to, then we agree. Okay.

So right now, the ones I'm remembering are California, Middlefield, Red Star. Perfect. Star Trek space in progress. Yeah. But those those three are the ones that I recall off the top of my head that are sort of, like, complete great street projects.

Loftus.

Oh, Loftus. Yes. Yes.

How can I forget?

Always. Okay. There was some public comment about QuickBuild, and I was just wondering if Zach kind of address that. Is that, I think that there was an idea that we could link it to the active transportation plan that's, you know, in progress, but, how we might be able to add those program now? I don't I don't know. I'm trying to understand what that sounds like part of the question.

I'll try to tackle the first part here. Okay.

How best can can we understand the implications of what a quick build program is on the city or Yeah. In some context to that. Right?

I'm getting this, from your question, how can a quick build be implemented? What's the tech I think I'll start the first half, and then maybe if director has anything to add. As we've are stepping back and looking at the whole department, we are splitting off the transportation planning and engineering. That may be a good opportunity to really get the cohesion between the planning, district district planning, and traffic engineering. They already are well communicate well together.

But under one division, I think that would really help. And I think at that time, we can evaluate what a program looks like for. How can we implement that? How can we engage our street maintenance folks or other vendors to identify kind of level of quick bills?

Can I piggyback off of that and ask a question? So when you're talking about how to implement quick builds, is VPAT gas can you advance the parking removal and put in twenty four hour bike lanes ahead of the rest of the project. In essence, isn't that a quick build sort of a request, or is a quick build something other?

I interpret a quick build really to be something that we're implementing in the field. That is really a new improvement, something that changes. I guess, in theory, we are changing parking restriction, but I'm envisioning, you know, an intersection improvement, a a corridor section improvement, adding something that is more related to some quick lifts.

Okay. If you did that did eliminated the parking and in a twenty four hour bike lane with plastic bollards, then is that a quick bill?

That that could be considered. Yes. Quick.

Trying to yeah.

And, again, once, you know, we are we reorganize the a public works department and have this engineering division, I think that's an element that they

really put into and figure out.

How can we what kind of resources are

you doing? Okay. Sorry for. Yes. Okay.

So I'm now remembering, and this is kind of in context to a project that council saw recently. So, this not only do we have pedestrians at cycle as, as users, this is the PTA bus route that's nice. And so, and I recall the conversation about the duck out, particularly in front of, the one upcoming project. So as we are doing improvements along Middle Field and apologies if I missed it in any of the, attachments, don't recall. How will we be addressing the safety of the new class four bike lanes with the existing this existing GTA bus route?

Hopefully, that makes sense.

Did make sense. Okay. So I think you're referring to the 490 East Pogo project

at the

That's corner of Alice. Yes. Like, that's just one example, but the bus stops along that corridor.

Sure. So I think, for just the bus stops along the corridor, I'm gonna let junior Gonzales kind of initiate that response, and then I can speak to the four ninety minutes.

Sure. So the project is 35%. We're moving into 65%. We're just initiating our conversations with Caltrans. So there is time to look at those treatments and see if there's ways to improve those.

But at this point, we would be creating a zone. So all the green striping that you see typically see in intersections or on driveways, that would be the same type of treatment you would see at a bus stop. So bus drivers, vehicle drivers, and bike and cyclists are all kind of cute that this is a conflict zone. So the other recommendation that was evaluated was could you have in lane stops for for for buses? In some cases, those are those are practical and feasible.

In a lot of other cases, you need additional right of way. You have to find a way to scoop the bikes and the pedestrians behind the bus for those to work. So it's a lot more work to to to make those work. So we can evaluate on a case by case basis to look to see if there's opportunities there. But right now, we have the constant striking in the lane and in the bus stop area, so we can essentially, there's a week.

Is, when this comes sorry. Before I forget again. When this comes back to counsel, might staff be able to work with PTA to let us know just how many stops there are on them to report over directions. I just think that would be, like, helpful context for us to understand just Yes. Okay. Great.

Yes. And then to your question regarding specifically to the development at 490 East Middlefield. So we expect that the Middlefield Complete Streets project is gonna be constructed before the development. So then as part of the development process, we do pretty detailed view of development projects. As part of that is the off-site sort of the sidewalk or bike lane, travel lanes, any modifications.

They will be found. We're coordinating with the developer, but there's gonna be a duck out Mhmm. Associated with that. And sponsored by principal general about how we'll evaluate those weeds and the proper application of bite lane treatments and a stitch, we would do that if that would be an effort to make sure that it's safe, provides enough to excuse me, for visibility, and that the treatments we're applying there make most sense. So we do that with the development application process. They would submit the detailed plans. We'd review it. We'd make sure that, know, the the field to the street process with me. And then they're coming in and basically revise. Okay. Okay.

Yeah. I I think I'm less concerned with that project and more about if that would exist along the court along the corridor if we would see, you know, maybe other redevelopments do that same thing. And if that you know, that's kind of where it is. I I appreciate that. And then, one of one of the things that I had brought up while we're looking at that project is that aren't a lot of, cues on what the state limit is.

And so in I I'm curious if in addition to, removal of the parking prior to the complete street project going forward, if we could just add some more signage on what the speed limit is. Because I have lived at Moffett and Middlefield, and now I live near Middlefield and Woodsman. And I do think a lot of the speeding is there are no signs. I can walk from Ellis to Wiseman, and I don't even think there's a sign, at least on that right that right side. I don't even know if there's a.

I know. Yeah. So that whole, yes, that whole block, which is very large, right, has no signage, and I think that's why people go 50 plus on that. Is that something that staff could look at doing as a part if we go forward with the, I think, recommendation? I would just ask colleagues. Okay. Great. Sorry to get into the comment. Did you like a straw poll? I don't know if there's any other questions, but those those are the ones that I'm now remembering. Thank thank you, Chair, for letting me ask those.

You're out

on a roll.

Okay. What else? It should it's gonna go to counseling.

That is

Yeah. I think

We need it all checked. We're just looking for

Yeah. It's the information and I think yeah. Well, thanks, staff, very much. Thanks to the the residents and the community for taking credit. I think one one of the things that I that comes to mind is that we can move forward with this version of the Complete Streets project, and it won't preclude us from looking in the future at a potential road.

I think that I'd love to see if the improvements that we make will help address the concerns that residents have about the user experience on Middlefield before moving to a road map. I think when we have looked when the city tends to look at what is the process called for the speed reduction? The Yeah. There's different levels with which there's different options with which you can choose, and I think there's different levers with which we trigger depending on what the issue is in the neighborhood. And so I would see this as this complete street project as being kind of step one as of an improvement.

I think moving to from class two to class four. I think move being able to remove that parking immediately, putting more signage, all of those will be heavy improvements, to what exists now. I'm, encouraged that staff is already in my notes. But at least for this the Caltrans segment, it sounds like there's a path forward not too long after the design moves forward for from design was sort of this project for the project. While I'm concerned about the CPUCTA section, I think the most immediate is just the Middle Hill corridor in general and then the the overpass of of over 85.

Because I, I do see people scurrying across, but it always makes my stomach churn. But there is an entrance on the side where there's, an exit entrance on the side where the sidewalk is for the trail. So I'm not sure which side people are on the other side, which how they're how they're getting up there because there's, no path on that side. But I think we're headed in the right direction. And I do feel like just because we don't have a a recent number for, member McAllister, somebody who walks and runs in the area, I am seeing more people out, and I do see more development coming in.

We have a new user who is, in in the space, on on Atlas. And so I'm already seeing a lot of walking and talking meetings happening. So I think the sooner we can make improvements, the better. K. Member McAllister. Okay.

How about a little more okay. I'm not as suggested as you guys have said. I have this fresh eyes. So I'm gonna probably be a little more pragmatic and more objective This project or the concept behind the project, I support, not a road diet. I've had conversations with others that we are still a car centric, and this is a regional quarter.

And, yes, we have we have El Camino. We have Central. But those get bogged down because there's a lot of commerce from there. We still need to have ways to get through. Highway 101 is always backed up, but that's beside we have north corridors that we need to be very conscious about. Ramp Road, Del Monte, San Antonio. We have East and west, like Cuesta. We have El Camino. We have Middlefield. And so we still need to be conscious that cars are not going away.

They're still here. And when I bring up the numbers, I always like to say, what is the data to support these projects? I see a lot of passion in people and their desire to put this in. And And every time I see public comment, people say, oh, there's a lot of support for it. Well, of course, you're gonna see a lot of support because these people are wanting these particular changes.

But we still have a silent majority out there that I sort of represent. This is a place I need to get from point a to point b, and I wanna get there efficiently and safely. I don't see a large percentage of the city bicyclists. I understand that there may be 3% of people on bikes. And so for us to spend money, which is limited for us, for the city, we have a lot of projects that I wanna see a demand.

I wanna see a critical mass of people using it and spend millions of dollars on a project that only benefits so many few that that's just I need to be able to feel better about supporting it. They're talking about road diets. There was just recently I mean, making the lane smaller. Just recently, we had a report from the fire department. The fire department said the response time is slowing down because of congestion.

And all of a sudden, you're taking Major Artery and you're going to make the lane smaller. And I think that's gonna affect that was brought up by staff to the emergency response for people to get there. And we do not wanna show any any access that the public safety needs to get to certain areas. I did spend I said I watched e p c VPAC in my comments, and they again, they're passionate, but I wanna see data. We saw data from 2018.

How many people are really using it? We saw traffic accidents from 2019, and it's a high thing. So in some regards, I see people looking at this subjectively, not objectively. And this is a broader for what I see throughout any project that comes along. And so from 2019, we had 20 2014 to 2019, there's 26 accidents.

Well, people say it's getting worse. Well, how can you say that unless you we have the data to support projects? And that's my feeling how we go forward on it. The the green space, the ATP, all that stuff, I support because that will enhance people. But that doesn't mean that just because you build it, they will come. And, Valerie, don't hate me for this one. I have a business right on El Camino. I there all the time, and I did not see people using El Camino to what some people say expected. So when I hear people say there's a lot of demand for it, let's hear the the data. How do you come up with that data?

They say that people will get to the El Camino. It's very I would not write on El It's not a run. So I'm always conscious of the amount of when I hear input. And I asked the example of 1,700 people. Postcards were sent out, and we got 28 back.

You know, to me, that says there's not a big demand, or there's a lot of no. There's not that much interest. So you always have to put in the back of your mind, yes, the people that are here that speak, they are wanna be heard and be safe, and I support Akron. I I appreciate their passion, but I don't see that they are the all ends of people saying this, we gotta do something. So that was more of a broader context of what I was saying.

And I appreciate staff looking at something and realizing maybe I could be one. But, yes, this is a regional quarter. It's put in there. We still have to be considerate about people moving out. Because if we don't have these regional quarters, words of the young gentlemen, persons came in, where are they gonna go? They're gonna go on side streets. No doubt about it. They're gonna hit any way they can get there, and Waze is gonna figure it out. And so we still need those major quarters to get people from from Palo Alto to Sunnyvale, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills to One Zero One. And they need to be able to keep moving.

We we need to be able to have that service so that it helps our residents. Support the recommendation, but those are things that I think we need to be aware of.

Okay. Thank you very much. So my comments are, I agree with both my committee members. People will continue to use cars, hopefully electric ones, which, yes, is getting expensive in front of the community. But, also, I think this is an area where, people are gonna use use bikes more, and particularly I particularly agree with the speaker, who talked about electric bikes, ebikes, kind of the changing nature.

I think that this is a corridor where where those particularly might be used. I think it's a little different than El Camino because El Camino has this is kind of a lovely border in terms of it's not all the way there, but it has a lot of trees. It has the median. I mean, I know El Camino has the median too, but, this has fewer lands than El Camino. And I feel like once, in our our whatever that was, my precise plan I was recused from is formally named.

North west east west east west Montprecise Plan. When that gets further build out, I feel like, you know, there's a large portion of this that's residential. I feel like the use will change. And I I like that that you're slowly moving, you know, a half foot here, a foot there into the buffer lane or whatever. Buffer lane, but a buffer between the bikers and pedestrians and the cars. So to me, the critical things for right now are, you know, like Deepak said, moving up the the parking removal and possibly even putting in bollards. I'm not a huge fan of bollards, but

and I would like

I really liked hearing from neighbors and what they envision. I'm thinking this is a paving project, but we have our active transportation project. And I'm hoping we'll quickly make that a safer bike route, you know, with the constraints of staff, you know, as soon as we can and migrate as much as we can. I mean, I would say maybe do one maybe you could consider one ten foot car lane, migrate as much as we can into the buffer. And maybe at some point in the future, you know, because I'm I at some point in the future, maybe that buffer can become a green buffer, which I've seen in other places and will photographs.

Place I drive to my mom's, Caulknife Creek, is is actually pretty similar to this, and it has a somewhat narrow green buffer for the bike lanes. Okay. So I also let's see if so I would like to hear in the future from neighbors what they feel about the plastic bollards. Many people feel they're not that safe and not that nice in front of residential places. We get them in temporarily.

What do people want? You know, how do people feel about them? And, you know, what kind of priority and where should, you know, her birth green strip be? But that I think is more for the future. I think that also I've heard a lot, and I agree with member Kameh about doing anything we can to reduce the speeds, whether it be and what is the speed supposed to be there? I just looked it up, and I just drove there. I didn't see any

35 right bus.

It's supposed to be 35? Yeah. So when when I went to planning school, we would talk about how streets read, which just means, like, when you're driving down the street, does it kind of say to you, do you kind of get the impression this is kind of like a freeway and I should be going 40 or 50? And honestly, that is the feeling I get when I'm there. So I want to give people the feeling that they should be going slower.

So eventually, probably get back to small green tires is what I would want. But I think that's more a thing for the ATV. Then in addition so I'm agreeing with previous members, you know, and BPAC, which is advance the parking removal, given staff constraints, do anything we can to slow down speeds. And this is maybe more for the ATP, but look at possible green infrastructure and and, you know, maybe over time, we will be able to have a road diet because everybody will be on ebikes and on the mass transportation in the area. And then my last thing is that we did get a group letter from really, a lot of people put a lot of work into it, and, it has four, five requests, many of them about process, and we've kind of been bringing it up during this meeting.

But some of it is about timing, and also, as member committee said, a complete green street screening checklist. And as Mr. Gonzales said, that's, you know, maybe changing over time. So maybe so they're making some requests around that, and we just have the biodiversity plan. So sort of highlighting that.

And I think we talked about the rest of the items there. So those are all of my comments, and thank you for all of your work.

Thank

you. Did that trigger any final comments for anyone? I think, when does it come to council? So

we'll take this to counsel when we have final PSNA plans and specifications. So we won't see this until the fall or later. The the last slide we show

Yeah. Oh, I'll be you'll be coming at Sorry. Comment.

Is that okay? We'll invite you back as as a special guest. We still need to go through the Caltrans process, So they need to provide the design input where there's process with eighty five and thirty seven. And then also the the o bag three grant process has its own set set of a checklist that we need to step through. But it takes six months right then. I get it. Final final.

Well, I would I I think what could be helpful is just being able to share with the community if their staff thought fund, like, the complete street screening checklist for future projects and then, the the quick build program. I think that that will continue to come up, and so I would just ask if staff could maybe have some thought on it. You put that on the agenda, some report. No. No.

Like, I I think as these projects come forward, we're we're gonna follow that might be a continued discussion. Yes. Or maybe as part of ATP. I don't know. I think it's just worth maybe pulling that thread a little bit and just where that might fit into all the other things. We're, we've been into ATP. Right now, we have to keep it regional, but or it's a Pfizer scope. I I don't know. I just No. I like Like you said, there you know, there's, you know, a few ideas and requests for the letter.

So just having some sort of response probably would be appreciated. Because I think we're con especially we I think I listed four or five complete street projects that the city is looking at. So as those conversations continue on too and we evaluate those, it just might be helpful for part, like, as part of the conversation. That's just

Yeah.

No. I like that you brought that up again. I think the community put a lot of work into that letter, and we brought it up in various ways tonight, but I think it will continue to come up. So if you can take it as a, you know, guideline set of guidelines for future projects, Because whether you do or not, I think it's gonna continue to come up. So And, Member McAllister, you look sad. What

No. I just know, I have a lot of work. Gotta get got going green, and I'm thinking green stripes. You're talking I know. Vegetation green, so I gotta change that one. But I thought this El Camino ten years ago was considered gonna be a great moment. You look at El Camino now, it's a little hard to envision what they thought ten years ago. Another thing is of the objective is we used to have five bike shops about I don't think we have any now. Right. So just something to think about

when repair cafe that comes with the. Yeah.

My thing.

Yeah. I know. That's why I said it. But they come and they go around or our bike rodeos brings the mobile bike.

But that's still, you know, Joel. Maybe that's when you consider the popularity, it's it's not the same.

No. I agree with you, and that's part of our previous you know, maybe somebody should put a bike shop in front.

Well, then we're looking at the ebikes at our last meeting. And if ebikes start using your protected bike lanes, there's where you may have potential.

So What's your day?

Thank you. Okay.

So think those are the final comments, and we will close this item and move on now to item number six, which is committee staff announcements, updates, requests, and committee report. So first, we have 6.1 is staff comments. Jennifer Ng from what? Director of. Actually, no staff comment.

No. Can't move on. Okay. So now we move to snap to 6.2, which is committee comments. Do any committee members have comments or reports to share? No. I thought you put photographs. I just

wanted to show you guys. We don't need to take

the time steps. Just want you

if there's someone you look at them and you see something that resonates with you, then

then we'll we'll bring it back.

Somebody else. I just don't want to.

Okay. I have some action to do already. So I have some I have some nice slides on this underway. I like you sharing photos, and I will be sharing mine at the next meeting.

Well, I think pictures were the best.

And they will be pictures of the place I drive by that I think Middlefield.

Photos are just examples. It's not just what you think your initial thought in this. I guess maybe we can look at it and some sort of.

So now we're at the part of the agenda where members of the public joining us virtually or in person can provide comments on the staff staff and and council, comments that we didn't have. Oh. As a member

of public, I'm very curious about the photographs. Yeah.

Here, you I will share

Bill's, like, you kind of got talked about.

I'll share my photographs with the remaining members of the public who are here if the remaining. They were discussed. All things weren't they weren't discussed. All discussed. Not discussing. Yes. So that Well, it's a commit we're we're still doing committee reports. Sorry. Yes. Would you have committee reports also? No. I just yes. Well, yeah, this is the part where the public gets to weigh in and and so Public

gets weighing in that you did Gus pictures that you

didn't watch that share up a

year ago.

Unfortunately, I only share

at first. I I said zero. Okay. Not you.

Remember McAllister mentioned these photographs. So they I think they are part of public records. Yes. Right. And I guess I my question or comment is what's interesting about these pictures.

Just just a sign? Yeah. How things are evolved. That's all. K. So

these are pictures of recent, recent published projects. So are there any virtual speakers?

Okay. So,

we will now move to item number seven, which is adjournment. Thank you so much for joining us. Our next council transportation committee meeting will be on 06/16/2026, and the meeting is adjourned at 08:47PM. Thank you.