Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee - Regular Meeting

Yes. I will do the roll call. Are we online yet? Okay, great. So, Chair Kuzma. Vice Chair Bontemps. Okay. Member Huang. Present. Member Barton. Absent. Member Stone. Absent. We have a quorum. 36.

With that, we will move on to item three, oral communication from the public. This portion will be observed. The person supposed to address the committee on any matter not on the agenda. Speakers will be limited to three minutes. State law prohibits the committee from acting on non-agenda items. Do we have any members of the public in the room? Please come to the lecture.

But I need to, we need to figure out how to unshare this property.

Well.

Did she need to see it? Yeah.

Sorry about this. I think you're taking up to three minutes.

No, no, we're not. We haven't started timing you yet.

You have to see it, too, so.

Well, I want to make sure that everything's set up properly anyways.

There it is. Awesome. OK, so I think we just do it now, OK? Go ahead. Hi.

I'm Becky Wright, 30 plus year amount of you. And I love riding my bike and I'm very happy that you all are serving on this committee. But tonight, what I really wanted to say was thank you for whatever input you had on the shoreline bicycle ped for past construction. Now, since I live over in Rex Manor, I take those paths and they have been bumpy forever and ever and horrible. And I'm just so thrilled that that work is actually taking place. And so for whatever part you all had in it to advocate for bicycles and pedestrians, I thank you very much. That's it. Thank you.

Do we have any members of the public online? You can raise your hand or press star nine on the phone if you want to speak. No? With that, we will move to item four, the consent calendar questions. Otherwise, it's just the meeting minutes. Does anyone want to pull anything from the consent calendar? No? Okay. Do we have any public comments on consent calendar? I assume no one in the room. Do we have anyone online? All right. A motion to approve the consent calendar would be in order. I move that we approve the consent calendar.

Aye.

Did I go ahead? Yeah, I'm sorry. So, Mr. Vaughn seconded and Mr. Vaughn seconded. All in favor? Aye. That passes unanimously with the three present here. that may resist you i am there's no one finished minute since then there's just item 6.1 active communication collision reports and i believe we have a presenter from this is lieutenant goth from the department and you have a presentation right both powerful

Oh, you have it up. Thank you.

As in the past, we've compiled the questions and used Prime Analyst. The majority of the answers. So I'm going to go to the first one. First question. So the first one was part of the problem with our dashboard. So one of the questions about it was there was an answer for null. It was our RIMS database. Our current report writing system is RIMS. And the data that transfers over is not working well. So that's been fixed on the dashboard.

Did you say what the acronym is, PCF, for members of the public? Sorry.

PCF is primary collision factor, which is what is the cause of the accident. So what we attribute the primary cause of the collision. Sorry. And go to the next one. Using the dashboard as an example, could MPPD provide PCF by type of vehicle, primary collision factor by type of vehicle? Since wrong way is only shown for vehicles versus bicycles, and based on observations, I would assume that bikes were the wrong way. But it'd be good to have the actual data. And the analyst said that we can add that as a recommendation for future iterations of the dashboard. And I think I'm probably repeating myself from the last time I was here, but our Crossroads report writing software, we're still working out the kinks. We're hoping to have that all turned on on July 1st. So there has been a lot of, I'm not tech savvy, so there's a lot of coding and language that needs to talk to each other. Our RMS system, the record maintenance system, is how we keep track of all of our contacts. And Crossroads has had language digital language issues with providing that information. So we're hoping that turns on July 1st and then a lot more of our analytics will be available and it'll be a lot better information. So next one, the dashboard related to bikes, does NBPD have a breakdown on the type of bikes? Regular class one to three, electric and motos. And we don't, and that's mainly due to the fact that the CHP collision form does not, up until recently, it did not have a category for those different vehicle types. So the Prosperous software is going to include this. And CHP has their iterations of the format change every year. And they've added go-peds, like the electric go-ped. They've added a category for one-wheel motorized boards. So we're going to be able to better analyze all that data going forward. We're continuously getting new forms from CHP, including self-driving. There's categories now for self-driving. So all that data will, going forward, be available for us to pull from. Part of it, too, is the education for our officers on the Class 1 to 3. That's not an easy thing to comprehend. And we have... We're sending an officer, Officer Hammond, who I presented going to a 40-hour e-device class to become an instructor. We're going to stand up a pretty significant e-device class. We're going to do town halls. We're going to do schools. We're really starting to push forward on the schools. We're trying to get permits for the kids to be able to bring their e-bikes to school and at the same time prohibit e-motorcycles from coming to school. So That's all going forward. That's the stuff that's working the process.

Next question.

What is MVPD doing to educate or enforce not riding the wrong way? So this mainly stems or starts with our schools. So our school resource officers and our motor officers conduct bicycle education, bike rodeos with safe routes. We're working on that. We're trying to to coordinate with them. It's a partnership with them where we participate in their program. That, along with heavy enforcement, the first week of school at the intersections, the majority of the kids are riding through. Other than that, adults, honestly, we don't really, usually it's more of like a motor officer with a PA getting on their PA speaker and telling them parents are on Southern Road. I can't think of any times where we've been writing citations for that, but it's usually verbal points. How many traffic tickets have been issued to bikes, scooters, hoverboards, from running red lights, et cetera, stats for the last six months? Again, this is not, we don't have a method for dividing the driver type on a citation. It's handwritten in that it's a bicycle instead of a car. So that box is not populated into our data tracking system. The new Crossroads e-tickets that we're going to be getting, we're going to go away from paper tickets to e-tickets. And that has a category for bicyclists, every different kind of category, pedestrian, driver, bicyclist. So that will allow us to track that data better for that. I know that we have written, I personally have written red light tickets to bicyclists on a, targeted bicycle enforcement days we're looking for and usually that's usually the kids at the schools but that was an adult though so i can't give an exact number about me and do we have statistics on the overall number of traffic collisions for minor major injuries and deaths over the past several years this is what we were able to pull from our ots office of traffic safety data that we've reported for the last three years There is some, if you look at the dashboard, there's probably some conflict in fatals. We don't work fatal accidents that happen on private property. And we've had a couple of those. One in particular was in the Walmart parking lot on a foggy day. Somebody was covered in a black blanket and was hit in the parking lot. So the RMS, the record maintenance system data may show a fatal, but it's fatal for vehicle collision. It's not on a roadway. And so we don't report that on a CHP form. So you may see a number that says three for 2023. I think the data said three, but it was really two that occurred on the roadway. And then just an update on our e-bike safety. Like I was saying, they've recently developed a class for police officers. It's a 40-hour class. It's basically inundated in everything that's e-device related. And it teaches the student how to put together their own program for the police department. Huntington Beach has kind of spearheaded this. They developed the program. So Officer Hammond will be going to that. He'll be coming back and partnering with school resource officers to put together a fairly significant class. It'll probably be, it'll coincide with the juvenile diversion program. So we'll issue juvenile diversion tickets to the juveniles who are riding without helmets riding the wrong way. Then they'll be required to come to a class with their parent. Same thing with the E devices. And the plan is to have town halls and required training. Do you have other questions? Some of them were kind of together. Kind of longer question.

You know, these implementations of these tickets, you know, for teachings only to children. I mean, have you considered for seniors also? The senior citizens I see, especially a lot of them from different countries, require that we can speak English. You know, they just go the other way. And then, you know, and then, you know, and then how you guys can really, you know, teach them. So, I mean, they're seniors too. They're going to, you know, if I get into an accident, none of them would go.

So on the adult, so the category for that type of stuff, we have a program called Life at 25. So that's one avenue where anybody who's on the roadway and commits a violation if they're under 25, we can send them to the Life at 25 program. That's an online class requirement where if they complete that, then the citation doesn't get submitted to the court. But that's within the constraints of the age. And if we don't, We don't have anything for senior citizens for that. That would probably be more of a warning. And so the new e-citations will have a warning option also. So we have written warning tickets, but I don't think anybody uses them. So it's usually they get a ticket, they just get a verbal warning. With the new system, we'll be able to enter it as a warning in the system. It will track that that person has been given a warning.

it'll go into our record maintenance system so that if we check them we'll find out that they weren't even born for that but as far as an education there's not something that would we can offer any other issues all right um i had a couple ups i realized at least one intent that i asked in advance didn't see that major so um but actually first related to what you're mentioning will the Will Officer Hammond's e-device instruction coordinate with our Safe Routes to School or any other things involved interacting with the students at our school with regards to active transportation?

So if those classes are held, if the bike rodeos are held prior to September, as soon as we can get him into the class in September, he's already kind of spearheading all of So all the brochures that we put out recently, the social media push that we've been doing, he created those and he's been running that program. So he will be having additional training to do that. If the Safe Routes bike rodeos occur before that, it'll be him that's participating. He just won't have that class on his belt where he's created the whole program. That's good.

I think the thing I'm more asking about just in general, like I don't want, for instance, to end up with, Brochures going out there to say one thing from the MVPD and then our Safe Routes to School program putting out a brochure that says a slightly different thing that might confuse people or cause problems.

So is there coordination going on? We have a meeting with them. Okay.

There is coordination. The safety officers are really engaged with the school community. So we should share the information. But we do have a meeting with them on July 8th.

Okay.

That's to kick off our new contract.

Oh, with the safe prices. I think I had a couple questions of mine about tracking of stolen bikes. I saw on the transparency dashboard that it looked like some had, there was maybe a reduction this year. I had trouble telling if that was a real reduction or just it varies a lot. And so maybe I shouldn't read anything into it.

Do you have any? I looked at the dashboard. It did look, it started out high.

Yeah.

And then it looked like it trended but a lot lower. I don't have the data from that. There's not a, I couldn't get into that data. So, but the numbers, the total numbers I can access, if the question was which bikes are being sold more often, it's in my, just in my experience as I'm seeing stuff come out, it's more, almost 100% e-bikes. The context of why.

Is that right? Is the rate of debt trending up, trending down, is it something that we should be worried about? Should we be paying more attention to providing secure bike parking? Or is it that things are actually working fine for most people and that there is, albeit with some, always persistent debt? And so that's something where I don't know if I should be reading too much into the statistics, so...

That's where I'm coming in. The statistics, I believe, are accurate, and it showed, to me, it was a significant reduction across the last four or five months. At the beginning of the year, it was higher. January was higher. So you do think it's focused more on bikes in the last couple years? Yes. And we had, I think we had a fairly significant arrest recently for somebody who was going into garages. I don't know if I can push it again, but I know our detectives are working.

Do we have any other questions? So I had one collaboration, making sure that, you know, safe route to school and MPPD has the same message. Is there coordination with Los Altos? Because there are thousands of kids from Mountain View who go to school in Los Altos, Los Altos Heights, Mountain View kids have Los Altos kids. That could be confusing for them to hear different stories.

I'm not sure if Los Altos has a Safe Routes program. They have one. I'm not sure.

And we've been in talks with them to make sure that our Safe Routes programs are coordinated. But for, I don't know if the PD is talking to PD.

I know they don't have school resource officers. I know our school resource officers help the city with the school. I'm not sure if they're in coordination with Safe Routes for Los Altos. Between departments, like sharing resources or training? I couldn't speak to, I don't know. That would probably be the school resource sergeant would be able to answer that, what their participation is at Los Altos.

We can follow up. Yeah. Okay. You know, I know jaywalking is permissible. It's jayfighting permissible, I think.

So the way that reads is if there is a collision caused by jaywalking, if the primary collision factor is jaywalking, then we can attribute it to that violation. But peace officers are not able to stop people who are jaywalking. We're prohibited from doing that now. So any of it. If you're in the street, it's... It's an unclear section. It's got to be, the way it's defined is that if the person in the roadway is a hazard to passing traffic, then it's a violation. But if they're crossing it and they're not causing the car to slow down or swerve or anything like that, then it's not a violation. We're not able to stop them.

Yeah, I mean, these bikers, sometimes they just think that they're, you know, they're all that and so they could just pass so fast and not as careful, so.

So if a bicyclist is operating the bike in an unsafe way, the vehicle code does allow for them to be stopped for a violation. If they're making an unsafe lane change, just like a car would, then it would apply. Then we can't stop them and they could be in a situation.

Moving to public comment on the active transportation pollution report. Do we have any members of the public in the room wishing to comment on this? Do we have any members of the public online Do we have any comments from the committee to, or I guess if there are any questions to Lieutenant Goff?

Thanks for answering our questions. Hopefully we don't repeat ourselves too much.

Thank you for the responses. I think it is helpful. I want to make sure we maintain our relationships. I would, if Once that data becomes available from Crossroads, I won't be surprised if feedback and other members of the public are interested in going to look at that. So if that gets forwarded or noted somewhere, that'd be great.

It will probably make its way out of the dashboard in a more... tangible way of understanding the information.

There are some people in this community who love to get heterotic, so it's going to be much better. And yeah, I appreciate the attitude towards e-devices of making sure that we try to make it so that kids and adults can use e-bicycles that they are allowed to use to not have to drive as much, but getting people who are riding motorcycles around a little bit

There's going to be a very clear enforcement effort.

And I encourage continued collaboration with our transportation department on all that. With that, I think we're going to sign off. And we'll move to item 6.2, the OBAG for complete streets checklists. And we have our presentation from Amy.

yeah but we also have robert gonzalez here who can speak to the actual projects if you have questions about the questions so um this is not an action item it is a discussion and um So we're asking the BPAC to review and provide comments on the Metropolitan Transportation Commission Complete Streets Checklist for the One Bay Area Grant applications to be submitted by the City of Mountain View. So One Bay Area Grant is a transportation funding source that's administered through BTA. It is administered or it opens up In this county, it's administered by VTA. It opens up about every four years. And the city of Mountain View took a look at projects that were in the pipeline, the scoring criteria for the OVAG grant, and where the projects were in their phasing and their ability to get completed within the timelines required by the grant. And we selected two projects. Everything is in your pocket. There are two intersection projects on El Camino. One is the El Camino, Real, Caldron Avenue, Phillips Avenue intersection improvements. We will be asking for funding for design and construction for that one. And the second one is El Camino, Real, Castro intersection, Castro Bikeway improvements. And we will be asking for construction funding for that because we already have funded the design. Rather than go through the projects, I'm just going to point out that we have in the packet checklists for each of the projects. So the MTC, which is the ultimate entity that has the funding source, requires that part of the grant application we fill out a complete streets checklist for each project and bring that checklist to the BPAC for review of the checklist And the primary goal of the VPAC review is to look at the project itself, look at the checklist, and see if there's anything we are missing in terms of different plans and efforts that the city has that relate to the project. And also, are there any components in the project that don't meet the goals So it's really to provide feedback on the checklist and make sure what we've developed is reasonable, make sure it's something that a lay person can understand, and comments on the checklist. If you want to also provide comments on the scope of work or have questions about the scope of work, Robert's here to provide responses to that. And with that, I will open up for conversation. And if you want, I have the checklists on my computer and I can share them if you want to point out a certain area in each checklist.

Questions on the clarifying questions.

I actually have a few about the, you know, because another, you know, I run a bike and it's a safety thing for me about seeing other, you know, bikers running the red. And also part of the plan is about age and disability kind of a plan that should be incorporated into this. I'm sure you know that already. But so, I mean, the new, the two projects that's going to go in, how is it going to have some sort of like a, a signal to the driver, to the bikers, and also it'll help the drivers too. There's a signal about that this is actually a one lane pathway, bike path, you know, rather than just, you know, let's just have a green lane. And then a lot of the bikers don't know that it's just, you know, one way and they think that they can go to the other way. Is there any kind of some sign or some sort of a notice to them? I'm trying to share this, which I think we can follow through.

Yeah, thanks for the question. Robert Gonzales, Civil Engineer at the Civil Infrastructure Group. At this point in the project, we are really starting up the design process. So Lauren Ledbetter mentioned kind of the competitiveness and selecting projects that could be delivered in that one to four year time frame. So the El Camino Real natural project is just starting out on the design, and the Calderon El Camino Real project has not begun yet on the design. So I think that's actually a really good design detail that we can go into with the design process and evaluate that. A Class 2 bike lane is a Class 2 bike lane, so it's going to be striped as a Class 2 bike lane, but there may be options to look at signage that, in addition to that, show you know, wrong way. I know in California, if you're cycling the wrong way, if you're opposite traffic, you'll see a sign that says, you know, bike's wrong way. So we can look at adding that type of signage.

The lane is so small, and then, you know, it's so easy to open. Yeah. And then the other thing is, besides it's just that, okay, and also, you know, for the bikers, drivers, I think that there should be some sort of a fairness to the drivers so that they don't feel like, you know, I talked to a lot of drivers, they hated when the bikers, they just run the red versus run the stock, you know, and so that maybe there's some sort of like a sign for the bikers to also let them know that they should follow the rules too and not just be arrogant driving, thinking that they're being good for the society and for the air.

So, and we can take this as a general comment as well, because these are two intersection improvements There's only so much you can do at one intersection to manage this sort of behavior. But this is something that we can take in as a general comment and look for ways to explore that through our educational projects and through our four-door projects, our delivery cycle bike infrastructure.

I want to note that I was able to finally screen share. So this is one of the projects. This is the Castro Street project. And... So these are in your packets. The other one, this is the Calderon Phyllis Avenue one. So this red is the limits of the project itself. And then this is a concept that was developed through the El Camino Real streetscape plan. I'll try to zoom in a little bit. So you can just see these are very conceptual, and we're putting these in the grant application. you know, if we receive the funding, we'll do the design work to validate that what's proposed here is something that's feasible.

I'm assuming you have questions.

Yeah, so, I mean, thanks for answering those questions. I had one of around who owns what and who's in charge of what. So there is talk about changing some signal signs, lights, and things like this. And from my experience, whenever I see a broken light, I mean, I've tried to reach sometimes Los Altos, sometimes Mountain View, and every time I'm sent back to Caltrans. So I'm wondering if for all this money that we're going to put here to put new signals or things like this, if we're going to still be dependent on Caltrans to kind of manage it or fix it or do it.

So, this project won't change the fact that it is a Caltrans right-of-way. We don't want that to change the fact. We want them to take responsibility for the right-of-way that they own and operate. We have proposed projects along El Camino that the city is sponsoring it, we're investing in maintenance. So, for example, when Caltrans did the pavement maintenance a few years ago, a couple years ago, we approached the Caltrans and volunteered to contribute to put in the bike infrastructure. They will maintain the bike infrastructure if it is to their design standards. Same thing with the signal infrastructure. We would voluntarily improve that, bring in grant funding or city funding to upgrade that signal infrastructure, but we would still be reliant on Caltrans. They would be responsible for the maintenance and operations of the signals. Yes.

I mean, for the public, it's a bit challenging to know.

There are very few local jurisdictions that have voluntarily taken on trans right-of-way. There's just a handful. Many of them just see that as an additional budgetary burden that we're already struggling to find. the budgets, the operating budgets that we need to maintain the infrastructure that we have and taking it on, whether it's county infrastructure or Caltrans infrastructure, we need them, their help and their funding to maintain the infrastructure that they have. That would be several signals that we would have to take on.

Could you, since it got mentioned briefly in the clarifying questions, is there anything to elaborate on regarding the green infrastructure elements that we considered for these? I saw that was in terms of store monitor retention for at least the Phyllis one, but I wasn't sure if there's any more detail to call out there.

Yeah, I mean, I'll start, and Robert, if you want to. jump in. For the Phyllis and El Camino, Phyllis Calder and El Camino one, there may be some space or opportunities to be able to provide green infrastructure. We'll have to get into that with the design. I do believe that with the Castro one, there's less space, if you want to confirm.

Yeah, that's correct. So like I said before, we're early in the design. We don't have details. I will mention that going back to the Caltrans element here, one of the more important things is to understand who would maintain the infrastructure and whose property would that infrastructure ultimately be on. So at some intersections, I'm thinking about the Almonte-Escuela intersection, the Caltrans right-of-way is very expansive. So much of that intersection, we're considering putting in green infrastructure and we're actively talking to Caltrans about taking credit for the investment that we're putting in there. This one is a little bit simpler. I think the right-of-way is very close to the crosswalk on both sides, on the north side, the Calderon side and the Villa side. So I think it's pretty clear that the green infrastructure will be on city property, but that is something that we want to confirm as we go through the design process.

I don't know who answered this question, but pulling on the thread of the, I asked a clarifying question about the Castro Commons project. I want to understand my impression. When this project originally, so just to make sure that we all understand what the current, this diagram is showing, that is showing a maintenance or parallel parking along the northbound side of Castro Street for that entire block. And once Castro Commons implemented, there will no longer be that road that's in the middle in the satellite imagery anymore. Instead, that'll just be a paseo. And so that's why the parking is all the way along there. Is that all a correct description of what this diagram is showing?

I'm going to ask.

Ed Arango, Civil Works Director. So this concept that you're looking at here is, I want to say it's four or five years old. Can I get, if you can answer that better to help me, is it 2021, 2022?

I think that's when it started. I think it last had some quick meetings in 23, but I think got started before that.

I think that that dates this well before the Castro Commons project. So when the Castro Commons project came in, we were looking at this frontage and we were trying to align what we want to do here with what they want to do along the frontage. So this isn't exactly how it's going to... The number of parking spaces that are parallel, they're needing some parking spaces taken away so they can provide a trash loading and unloading for their facility. So it's kind of closer to Yosemite. Those spaces we're looking at removing and making that trash pickup drop off area. And so and other revisions along it. Generally, it's close to it, but it's not this exactly. So I just want to kind of provide that context that during the Castro-Commons view of the development impediments, we did some working with the development manipulators just a little bit. It's still the intent, but it's not exactly like this. The number of spaces may change.

Okay. And does the city have any commitments to the developer regarding the number of street parking spaces that are along this frontage? Or is that just regarding the city's making sure to provide the access for trash pickup and such?

Yeah, no number of spaces are. There's a commitment to that. So we have a possibility. We try to avoid taking away parking spaces because we know there's a large demand in downtown. So we limit that. So we were very prudent about confirming how many spaces we were moving. Can we limit that for what they need?

And is the expectation that the spaces here would predominantly be used by tenants, whether commercial, retail, or customers of that Castro Commons project, which will cover that whole block, right?

Yeah, we really envision that the use of the parking spaces would be by customers, you know, because it's going to be mixed use, as well as just those who just want to visit further down and they can't find parking right in front of other blocks, other retailers, they might park here as well. Okay.

I have things to comment on in that regard, but I'll save that for a comment section.

clarifying on the current setting, it is the parking parallel or is it angled?

It's angled today.

And if I'm not mistaken, it's a little bit off street, right? In a way, so it's not flush with You know, right now it's angled, but it goes inside the sidewalk, kind of.

Yeah, the parking stalls and the sidewalk are separated by stairs.

Yeah.

And so it's separate, but it's an area of off-street, sorry, outside of the vehicle lane. Yeah, so that's kind of off-street parking. Yeah, and then the sidewalk. So would it be the same setup here, or in other words, would it be It would be parallel parking instead of angled. So you can see here all the seats. Would it be kind of encroaching on the sidewalk kind of? Oh, I think what we, for the Castro Common, we reclaimed the sidewalk and then it's going to be straight. We reclaimed. So we're reallocating space, recognizing that we wanted to provide a bike lane on Castro. And so we had to reallocate the space. So the sidewalk, I think, generally is going to stay about the same. But now we get a bike lane on both sides of the street out of it. And then we can only fit parallel parking there instead of the A. I think that's all.

Oh, the nature of those city-owned lots at both sort of Phyllis and that small side street whose name I'm blanking on and at the corner of Phyllis Mountain, you know. Is the plan basically just for those, do those have any special reservation for things in city's plans or are they basically just We may use them for green elements or store water retention or whatever.

I do not know the answer to that question.

I just had no idea those were even sitting on property. So that surprised me. Yeah. Okay. All right. In that case, I believe we have another question.

Yeah. You know those corner islands that people call, right? So, I mean, have they been shown to be effective on you? You guys know anything about that? I don't know. So I don't know why, you know, these corn islands, would it be safe for the pedestrians? I know they would probably just want to jump onto it, you know, in terms of the streetlights or anything. Go ahead.

I can start, but I'm going to defer to my transportation manager's expertise here. My understanding is that these are very protective elements there. They There are places for refuge in the same way that you would have a refuge island, whether it used to be just in the median or you weren't crossing a street, but these are places where, particularly if you have a raised curve on 1.2, the Charleston Shoreline Boulevard intersection, that was improved eight years ago, but that has raised protective islands and it provides... both bikes and pets a place to kind of stage themselves as they're waiting for a for a light so yeah it would take it would take a much higher design speed for a vehicle to actually mount that and get get through it so it's very protective compared to somebody who may may not really have a space in a conventional corner they might be sharing space between the bikes and the pets that might be out of space, or a bicyclist who is in a class, a class two bike lane waiting for a light. I would just say, yeah, they definitely provide a lot of protection.

So there's a ramp too going up. There should be like, there will be a bicycle ramp.

There's different, there's different ways to design. Some of them, I've seen, I've seen them with and without ramps.

Yeah, I mean, you can see there just between these two, they're slightly different. This one here is very, very conceptual, right? Just this is approximately what it could look like. In terms of how the pedestrian would use it, if I zoom in a little bit, the pedestrian will be waiting on the sidewalk. And then when they get the green, they can cross here. Right.

So this is not really a, this is not big enough really for pedestrian to wait out here.

They may, but this type of design, the intention is the pedestrian would still be waiting at the corner. But this, this area is a little bit less of a conflict between the motorists. And then you can see this is slightly similar but slightly different geometry. You really need to customize the design and everything based on every individual corner. So this is fairly similar where the pedestrian would cross the bike lane here. They could potentially wait here and then cross. So this would be the most likely raised area. So for the motorist, this would read at the edge of the Right here.

The push button would be on the sidewalk.

It would be on the sidewalk. Yeah.

That's typically how it's done. Other ones might feel clearer. This one, probably design, I'm not too sure. OK. Yeah.

If I could add two more benefits. So protected intersections, as we're learning more about them and implementing them. So one of the major focuses of safety is speed.

Another one is visibility.

And so when you, as a vehicle, and you're trying to turn the corner, your ability to navigate that corner changes with the reduced amount of space you have to navigate. So that's reducing your speed. You can't navigate it as quickly, so you will slow down to take, so that helps. Also, safety. But as well as where bicycles place themselves as they're waiting for the light. So there's a red light, the cars are stopped, the bicycles are stopped. But the bicyclists can put themselves ahead of the vehicle. So you can see it if your left right is El Camino. And if I was traveling from left to right and there was a red light, everybody stops. But then the bicycle can go all the way up to that point right there. And they can wait there for the green light, giving them a head start. If the vehicle wants to turn right, it really provides that visibility. And even when it's green, that vehicle needs to turn at a slower speed and face that bike lane at a more perspective, at a straight perspective, which is kind of editing. So again, speed and safety is the premise behind this. And those elements help provide reduced speed . Yeah.

Yeah, definitely. Sounds quite clear about that.

In your scenario, wouldn't the bike be crossing, right?

So in this scenario, you're not crossing the red until they get the green. So there's no intersection that they're crossing. There may be a bicyclist coming from the top to bottom.

There is a green signal for pedestrians there. So they have to yield.

And they have to have a road. They have to yield to pedestrians.

But it's a red light, so it's ready to stop. So your stop bar is sort of up in the air.

A lot of this is going to conflict with pedestrians.

I'm just thinking, you know, a lot of times I think sometimes really need to tell drivers on, you know, how to change the Because they have the implement the rules on the DMV. I mean, it's not the California job. And so maybe the drivers really also need to know to tell these drivers to stop down, stop a little bit when they see that junction. Yeah. Good. Yeah.

So let's move on to public comment on the full bag for the streets checklists. Do you have any members of the public at the river? Please come to the left.

This is kind of a side light, but his comment just brought out. I rode my bike over here to the beach today. And when I got to the El Camino Castro intersection, and I'm waiting for the light to turn so I can cross El Camino. There were pedestrians there as well. Very crowded, actually. The pedestrians started out as soon as the green light was there. But the car that was also waiting to turn right, which we get much more now, can't cross. hardly saw that pedestrian. And actually a pedestrian got across, but then the car went and then the rest. And so your comment about visibility and having islands and things that help the drivers remember to slow down, I think are a very vital part of because it's that visibility. And we all as drivers have to remember it. I'm working right now on the Dutch door opening where you turn around to look see if a bicycle is coming before you open your door as you're parallel parking. So I really appreciate that you're looking at these kinds of issues to make sure that pedestrians and bicycles can be safe. Thank you.

Do we have any members of the public on Zoom wishing to speak? All right, then we'll move on to committee comments, if there's anything you wish to comment on regarding... Actually, could we put up that... Do you have that list of questions or bullets that you want us to be addressing?

Not that we can't mention some other things, but... Let's see. I don't think I have it here. I can tell you what they are, though.

Just remind us about things to mention.

Are the answers to the checklist clear and understandable to a layperson? Has the project sufficiently incorporated Complete Streets recommendations outlined in adopted plans? One is if an exception to the Complete Streets checklist is requested, is it reasonable? But we are not asking for any exceptions. So there's really just three. The third one is, are there any additional comments related to the project? Okay.

the committee had additional things to comment on.

Thank you very much. So first on the checklist that I had asked on clarifying questions, you know, that pointed to some inconsistencies sometimes on the documents references and maybe adding some. You got that. Thanks. Thanks. And building on to the El Camino Precise Plan is also the growth that's projected for El Camino. So, you know, I think it's a plus for the application. In fact, we can see the effect of the densification at the Castro because we currently have multi-stories residential and multi-story business. And then the other two corners will soon have multi-story. So it's going to look more like an urban intersection, which is kind of where I'm at, even though it's a city. It's a boring city, I guess. And then I comment some more. general about the intersections. And mostly from a pedestrian standpoint. So if I look at the intersections across El Camino, they are some of the most challenging ones for pedestrians in the city. There was a lot of work that had been done by Catrans by repaving and providing things, but very little, anything, anything that was done for pedestrians. There were a few mid-block crossings, but nothing was done really for pedestrians. There was re-striping, maybe some signals got improved even though they broke a few times since, but there is nothing really. But I'm going to go first with the issues with the intersections as pedestrians. I work through these interactions at least once a week to go to do a shift at CSA. And then whenever I come here. So today I work twice. But the first thing is that they are very long for, you know, in distance for the students who do this. So that's not an issue for me, but I've seen many times people are kind of stuck in the middle because they couldn't make it through the amount of time. And if you look at most of the dashics and that's a very scary thought because, uh, except for Castro and they are not perfect, they are pretty much no safety items. So when people get stuck in the middle, if they kind of try to go as close as possible to the side, some for, for some of them, there is still a push button to try to get back in the signal. Uh, and. an aggravating thing is that in a lot of intersections, people can do U-turns. So you're pretty much stuck in the middle of the intersection and with cars doing U-turns there. So that's a scary thing. The other thing that's not ideal with this intersection is that it takes a very long time to cross them. Not by distance, just waiting for the signal. So every time I walk, if I'm lucky, everything works fine. But if I'm not lucky, it's easily five minutes to cross El Camino. And crossing El Camino is often a two-step process because when I come here, of do a diagonal if you will. I typically cross by shoreline, but it means waiting for a phase for ever crossing shoreline and then waiting for another phase for this and Usually I press both directions, you know, hoping that it works, but there is nothing synchronized. So you press one button, it's not going to even go what you want to do. So, uh, and five minutes, it's quite a long time. Uh, especially if you consider that people are, you know, need to process, you know, to go catch a bus or something like this. Five minute delays. It's a mid bus. the other thing that's far from ideal is the lightning on the intersections on the crosswalk and it's kind of a typical design I think at least in California where you're going to have one street light of typically a signal sign that's going to be on one side and the street is not very wide, and it's sufficient to illuminate everything. First of all, it's not always really lined up with a crosswalk, so sometimes it's a bit off. But with a street, as El Camino, with so many lines, what you wind up is to have good visibility on one side of a crosswalk and pretty much diminishing visibility as you go to the other side. And sometimes it's quite dark. which is not a good thing. The other thing that's missing on El Camino in general is also pedestrian level type of lighting. And that's important as you approach the intersections because it's a way, first of all, not to trip yourself, to feel safe. I mean, I work at night on El Camino. I'm fine by that, you know. I'm not really somebody who you would want to necessarily attack, but I can see that's a deterrent for people. That's a question of safety there. So there are a few places where you have pedestrian level, I think. So that's on one side of the Castro. On this side, I guess, of the Castro, you can do intersections. There's nothing on the other side. There's nothing really by Shoreline or by Rensdorf. but that's pedestrian lighting. And the pedestrian level lighting is also important to have better visibility for bikes on the bike lanes because the same issue that I described where the light is on one side and fails to eliminate everything, it means that it's pretty dark on the back lane on the opposite side of the line. The lights are also typically pretty high up, so they are above the trees. So you pretty much illuminate whatever lives in the trees, but it doesn't reach the pedestrians or the bikes. So pedestrian-level type of lighting is very important for both bikes and pedestrians on the approach to this intersection. And so when I look at the projects, I don't see much being done to address these issues. And I don't want to really script what you should be doing, but I think there needs to be much more emphasis on pedestrian.

Okay.

for the benefits being proposed. I don't see much benefits for pedestrians in there. There could be a little bit of protected things for the safety there. I think in one of the checklists it mentions kind of reducing the length for crossing, but I think it's not accurate because as a pedestrian you'd still be waiting on the sidewalk. you know, and the distance would be the same. You would just have to cross six or seven lines of traffic and two bike lanes. And then one comment I wanted to provide about these treatments where you kind of have to also cross a bike lane, essentially, there. I was in France in May, in Paris, and Paris has done great things for bikes and so on. Um, but, uh, and it's still wonderful to walk or things like this, except on crosswalks, uh, because now you have a similar type of treatments where you can have the bike lane, little island, then crossing the traffic, some things like this. And maybe it's specific to Parisians. I'm not from Paris, so I can bash van there, but. they never, never stop. You can try eye contact, you can try eye viewing, you know, and I've got plenty of friends to be proud of for that, but it's like, they just don't stop. And it's actually dangerous and frightening and stressful, which walking shouldn't be. So if we go for something like this, I would want very strict rules where, you know, red is red, pretty much, you know, Pedestrians have waited five minutes to get their light to grow. It should be respected. No exceptions. And pretty much strict enforcement on this. Because it's crazy. And I'm hoping Mountain View residents are not Parisians. But some of them may be from New York. Just as a

Thank you. I agree.

Can I ask two clarifying things about your comments I just shared? First off, I was realizing this as you were mentioning some of the other things. I don't walk through these intersections all that frequently myself. When it rains, do we currently have problems with ponding at the curb cuts? I don't think at the curb cuts.

Okay, so people aren't having to step through water when it rains to... No. But it also... This is California.

And I also don't walk. And I'm trying to make sure that I understand what your comments about conflicts between cyclists and pedestrians in the crosswalks are related to is that the only conflict I see, which I'm not saying it's not a conflict, but the only conflict I see is that basically as cyclists are arriving at the intersection at a red light, they will cross the crosswalk where there may be pedestrians or pedestrians may have the right of way at that time. to get up ahead of the drivers where cyclists are supposed to stop. Is that the main spot where you're referring to?

Yeah, and the spot is really that they should be stopping to let pedestrians go. That's the rule of the road. Because, again, from my experience in Paris, cyclists will not stop. They're not here. They're just grace or trying to... you know, will them to do this. I mean, that's just, you know, it's putting from good, bad behavior, you know.

Okay, I guess my comment on that, it will be at similar style intersections I've seen in downtown San Jose. I don't get the impression I've seen too many issues in that regard, but I'm also not there perhaps at the peak hours. So maybe I am missing something that happens, like it's really busy. But at existing protected intersections, I haven't. I guess I'd be curious if there's any issues people have had at that. or whatever we, some of the Google North Asia ones, where there are extremely high volumes of cyclists and pedestrians. I would be curious to know if we have any issues there, or if it's just working fine. If it's just working fine, then I won't stress about these.

I think it's a different setup than this.

It's more like a staging area, a breaking area for everyone. No, that one has, it's slightly different, but I think it's a very similar style.

so just to respond i think this is really helpful input for us when we're starting to go into the design phase because i believe that there can be treatments that we can put in that make it clear to bicyclists that they either have to stop or yield um and i don't want to i mean one one option is you could actually have it set up so that the bicyclist had to ramp up and it was almost like this the frost walk was that way that's one example. But, you know, I don't want to promise one designer and another, because we haven't gotten into that. But I think noting that we should look at designs that reduce conflicts between pedestrians and bicyclists is going to be important to put in our notes when we're moving forward with the project. Does that make sense?

I'm going to run through a few of my comments and try to I want to mention on design for it. It's too far along, but that's just what I think will be important for the applications themselves. I do think these are both projects. These intersections as the people's out are high priority city in terms of safety and the protected elements like what assistant public structure was calling out about reducing I don't use these intersections every day, I do use Central and Castro slash Moffat every single day basically, and at least one of the right turns there. It's not great, it would do a lot better if we had something that looked like this. I believe at least the Phyllis Calderon one already has no right turn on red. I don't know if that goes well with protected intersections. So I hope we do that. I think in terms of the project applications, I didn't have any things about the nature of the applications themselves. I do, I think mentioning the stormwater stuff, I don't know if that actually matters for what the nominal stuff on the checklist. I can't remember if the community criteria currently includes a, do you have lots of letters from local organizations? I know some of these grant applications do. Yes. But if you're explicitly pulling out those sorts of water treatment things that may not reach out to like the local marine species group or the such, you might be able to get additional support to help this project. And it would presumably be good to do, but on its own merits. But just for the brand side itself, regarding protected intersections, I might have found myself, over the past few years, doing a lot more two-stage left turns, which wasn't mentioned, but actually doesn't really lose you that much time and sometimes gains you time as a cyclist, just crossing in the bike lane, then turning and crossing in the other bike lane. And it's a lot safer. Protected intersections make that a lot nicer. design element that I would like to see paid attention to is whether any of the protection corners end up in a way that is hazardous to cyclists riding through. I have heard, I guess, minor complaints about some of the California street intersections. And I've sort of felt that when I've ridden through it a few times of that the plastic bollards can feel a bit abrupt when you're riding through. and sort of force people to veer in the bike lane more sharply than they're entirely comfortable with. I don't think that's the biggest design. I think that's still a good project to have done. I just want to pay attention to it as we go forward with this. I think one thing that will make the application stronger and make the projects better would be basically getting more of the bike lanes protected. And the spots where I see that are on northbound Castro, my impression is that a lot of the reason for retaining that parking in those original plans was because there were businesses there at the time who were expecting customers to be able to use that parking because it had been there for a while. With the Castro Commons project, that is no longer the case. There are actually businesses, I believe there's at least one business still there right at the moment, but once it's rebuilt, presumably that will correspond to a lot of change. And that bike lane, I'm not, I'm not convinced it, I think it'll get a lot of double parking if we have it retained in its current form because that bike lane is basically wide enough to park another vehicle there, a delivery vehicle or a drop off. It's, you'll have people pulling in and out of parking spaces and I don't, it's only like 10 to 15 spaces once you deal with whatever trash and recycling drop off and that sort of thing you need. So getting some way to make that protected. Amazing. Um, yeah, I think that would make that a lot, a lot safer. It's make a lot safer. It's stronger. Um, the other spots I noticed for additional protection were potentially along Phyllis on the approach to El Camino. Um, where I think there might even be enough right of way to just make the northbound, I have no idea. Southbound, it looks like you probably have the right of way to do some parking protected bike lanes. I don't know if that parking is even used much right now. Um, but that I think would make that object a bit stronger. Um, and then I don't know what the right of way situation is for the bus stops that would, might be affected by either project. I think it's mostly the Phyllis one though, but if we can make those be some form of island so that the buses that are going through are not pulling across the bike lane constantly, that would make things better. I don't, I don't know what the right of way constraints are. I don't know if that's something we're moving the bus stop 100 feet would make the right way better.

Yeah. There's a bus stop here.

Yeah. I believe.

Actually, I think the other bus stop is over here.

I think they're both on the eastern side.

And then Castro. All right. Getting more oriented.

Castro, it's by the. It's on the upper side. Oh, yeah. That's by the early design. On that top side. Right side. Yeah. There. And then there's on the reverse. I don't know if either of those are covered by the project boundaries. I also don't know if the ones that are along Castro are covered. I think there's only one that's on south of Castro that might be covered by the project boundaries.

So the Complete Streets checklist also requires coordination with VTA. We submitted this exact package to VTA at the beginning of the month. We'll be hearing back from them by the end of the month. We talked about that exact question, should we consider this? And we generally felt that that would make it a much, much bigger project. And it also would need a lot of approval from VTA. We don't even know if VTA is willing to move forward with that type of design. You would most likely need to take right-of-way in order to provide the full transit boarding island width. It just becomes a much bigger project. So we're waiting to see what APA says. But at this point in time, we were not intending on building transit boarding islands with these projects, even though there's transit right adjacent.

I don't know if you can put back the .. So that would be pretty much the left. site for you know at the bottom left there about the things there is you know where the chess building is uh i think part of it is also part of that project we move the like nights kind of inside and separated from from the bus yeah there there is a design there's a project kind of an island thing but it's

So this design will integrate into the development that's happening on that corner.

I know that the bus stops at Castro are more important than the ones at Phyllis because they're also 5.2 stops. Yeah, they are. But anyways, it's good to know that we said discussion is happening, and it's happening. For the Phyllis project, I mean, the... Along Phyllis itself, there's currently just some striping that sort of provides the lane width. I'm not sure if it would make sense to sort of on southbound Phyllis coming out of the interception. There's just striping to define the width of the southbound lane. I'm not sure if it makes sense to try to provide some. to make sure that lane was narrow enough that people were less likely to speed down Phyllis to the stop sign. I don't know how necessary that is. I'll mention that as a thing to consider.

Could you just repeat the- So southbound Phyllis coming out of the intersection.

There's one lane of through traffic for vehicles. The asphalt itself is quite wide. And so there's just some diagonal striping to define where cars are not supposed to go. However, that means that there's physically sort of a car can still go pretty fast through there, even though the lane, I don't know exactly where the lane's going to be. So I don't know how important that is.

I will point out that this is a very conceptual sketch.

Yep, I know.

And it may not look exactly like this. Yeah, so note it. Understood.

And then...

What I heard from that is you want to ensure that there's not excess pavement.

There's not excess pavement. We've had a couple discussions at recent meetings about lane narrowing, making sure that we're doing what we can to reduce the speeds. We're checking all the boxes of the different tools we have to reduce vehicle speeds.

So your primary goal is to reduce vehicle speeds through geometric measures. Okay. That is what I'm getting at, yes. And I'm calling out specific sign-outs that could potentially give.

Yep. Thank you for that summation. And the last thing that was on my mind was that I don't know for integrating with other plans, making sure that we have whatever good access is for that Paseo, the oral place, Fairmont, I believe. on the Castro project. I don't know if some is in order to access between the bike path and Paseo, but having good access so that we have a good network will be desirable, I'm sure.

I suspect that will be part of the development project as opposed to this project, but no doubt it will.

anything addressing there.

But as I said, good projects to be doing I ride through the circle right through the Castro and up and you know, I don't walk through these intersections quite as frequently myself, but yeah.

Yeah. I'm wondering whether it's part of the obligation to get this funding that, you know, or even, you know, whether Mountain View or any other city has even thought about what are these all the green lights? green lines on the street. But for those, and also these laws also permit these bicyclists to make left turns. So once they get out of these green pathways, and then for El Camino, such a busy path, they want to go into the left into Castro. The Castro, I'm not, sorry, sorry. Calderon. Yeah, this is Calderon. Yeah, they want to go into there. And then, so they have to make a, you know, they have to do their hand signals. They have to go with hand signals and then pass all these parts in order to go into the left lane. And so is it part of a competition for Mountain View or any kind of or even just a rule, some kind of rule to say, to make that facilitate that kind of a

But I would say a design like this with a protected intersection, it facilitates a different way of making that turn. So it allows the bicyclists to come across the street and then wait. And actually there's typically the way you design it is there's enough space for a bicyclist to wait out of the way of the through bicyclists and then set themselves up to go across the street when they get the green. So it's a two stage left turn like James was mentioning. If you, that doesn't, preclude someone who is a very avid, adventurous, you know, vehicular cyclist from crossing the three lanes of traffic and waiting at the left turn lane. And all of the left turn lanes should have a detection that would detect bicyclists. So they would trigger the left and they could go on the green. I haven't biked enough on El Camino to see how many people do that in Mountain View. But my experience is that very few people will actually do that. because of the volumes, because of the speeds, and because of the number of lanes. And most people typically do that left, the two-stage left.

When there's that many lanes, the two-stage left turns, if this was a one-in-one, yes, you'd see more people doing that. But something with this traffic volume and number of lanes.

Exactly. So to facilitate that for the bicyclists who feel comfortable doing that, If you can see, I don't remember exactly what it looks like now at this particular location. But if there's a break in advance of the intersection, they could then get out of the class 4 bike lane, safely move across. And then, of course, there's the detection that allows them to turn. And that is the limit of the facilitation that

typically provided on a road like this with with a with you know with a long-term kind of a perspective uh with common street that they want to implement and then you know more bikes you know more bikes on the street all over the place and then in groups a lot of the kids you know who's gonna bike and there's all squished there and then they just want to make a left turn going through that way you know this is a this is a student um

This is a school intersection. There's a lot of students who use this. And so we're going to be looking even more closely at how people are currently using this and what types of behaviors we want to accommodate and facilitate when we're doing the design.

Yeah, that's one thing I want to make sure. I mentioned that in my question. People may come from apartment complex, like right on the corner. And so this kid may come out on the sidewalk on their bike because they're coming straight out of an apartment complex or the such.

And so making sure that's safe is, I think, good. But anyways, I believe you were going to say something. So I had one question on this diagram, actually. So if you look at the kind of dotted kind of back lane next to the crosswalk across El Camino.

Right, like the crosswalk here.

Are they one way or?

These would be one way. Yeah, that's the intention.

I've seen some like this by Rengsdorf that are used both ways. And I don't blame them, because there is no crosswalk on the other side. But that's not right.

No, on Rengsdorf.

Yeah, Rengsdorf has only one crosswalk. So I can see that. But they wind up on the other. And then they keep biking down.

It's certainly possible to do that given the appropriate signalization and the appropriate infrastructure going in either direction. But I don't think we had considered that for this or for Castro because they're pedestrian crossing.

Yeah. You know, why not with, you know. Okay. Thank you. So what I'm hearing is. Describing a possibility.

He likes having it on both legs. Yes. Okay. And you like one way cross bike. All right.

And then I had two more comments, if I may. So one is to reiterate that whenever possible, we should put no right on right. These are very easy intersections. Both of them have school, you know, out of Rwanda school. I mean, if we have to put it anywhere, it's there. And I don't know, Caltrans seems to be okay with putting some, you know, they let us. put some there and I think these are great places to do this and then the other thing too is it's pretty inconsistent across El Camino regarding returns like at Shoreline you cannot do one but you can do one at Castro which to me doesn't make any sense it's much easier and much more things and honestly I don't I can't think of another city where we would have this type of YouTube on such a street. And I'm not sure what leeway Mountain View has to do because I think it would simplify pretty much the movements there. It wouldn't be as scary when people get stuck in the middle of a crosswalk because people can do that type of thing. And I think it may actually speed up traffic because when somebody does a U-turn, they kind of prevent people to do a left turn because they have to do it very slowly. I think it's anything that can reduce the type of movement is a good thing. All right.

If there's anything, I don't have anyone to move on to the next item. All right.

Okay, great.

Did you want to summarize any of that?

I have lots of notes. I'm not going to summarize all of them, but I will tell you the next steps. I'm going to take these notes, put them together, and attach those notes to the final checklist that we submit to MTC through their online portal. So this information is going to be packaged and sent with the grant application.

And then we find out if we did or did not receive this grant.

Probably in like the initial would be So it's a little weird. Initial would be probably September timeframe. Probably September timeframe. We get selected by VTA to go to MTA. That's the first cut. So VTA is nominating projects. They're nominating 120% of the total amount of budget that is expected to be allocated to VTA. Okay. And then that goes up to MTC and MTC makes the final decision. So we'll know if we make it past round one, but then we go to round two. So I would say final, I think it's probably going to be January, February, maybe December. So in the winter. No, it's decided by MTC. Well, it's two steps. The answer is yes. It's basically like round one and round two. So first we have to pass round one with VTA. And if we do that, VTA will move it up to MTC and then MTC will select from what VTA provides. Okay. I think these are very good projects, but I think we are also competing against some other very, very strong candidates, and I think there's probably going to be about 30 to 35 projects that are submitted to BTA. It's very competitive. It's very competitive, yeah. But I think there's a lot going for these projects where they will be really compelling, and we're going to do our best to write an exceptional grant application.

to be allocated it by geography. They do not. Technically, yes.

There's a provision specifically in BT's grant guidelines about how many applications they can nominate from San Jose itself. Well, I think they can't end up nominating more than half of their 120% from any one jurisdiction. And my understanding is that that exists because San Jose presented a lot of good projects one year and got a very large percentage of the projects however for the sb 63 did make that request that when vta gets to distribute if that pass is valid then

that was one of the recommendations from mouth view was that it was allocated by in two jurisdictions it wasn't competitive more competitive is characteristic get back anyway anyways let us move on to item 6.3 the draft fiscal year 2026-27 tentative agenda list thank you okay this is my item as well so we do this every year this is the first time i've done it um this is

an action to accept the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee's draft fiscal year 2026-2027 work plan. And then my understanding of that goes up to city council for the final approval for all of the committees. So as you know, I did email, thank you, to the chair to suggest that I do this. I emailed the committee asking if you would want to submit one to two potential requests for the work plan, specifically looking at requests that are within the purview of the BPAC and the BPAC bylaws, as well as BPAC's advisory role to city council. And we did get some requests, and I'm going to walk through generally- Yeah, that's pretty good. So yeah, I guess you can read that. So I just wanted to kind of share you how I addressed in the work plan. Because of the timing, I didn't have a lot of time to circle back with individual staff to confirm, can I put this specific item in the work plan? So what you'll see is I have a general item, but I don't have bullets underneath it saying, well, this will look at this, look at this. And that's purely because I did not actually have the time to confirm and I didn't want to promise something. Right. But so we'll start just this is a no order that on the left is a summary of the request on the right is how we accommodated it in the work plan. So establish a no right turn on red policy and start implementation. So I added to the work plan item nine update feedback on implementation of the active transportation plan policies and programs. The no Right, turn on red. That acronym's not the right acronym, sorry. I keep on doing that. Thank you. It is recommended by the public review draft to evaluate a policy for that. So I thought that could fit under that. And that's true with many of these things as well. So small scale projects that can be implemented quickly without full roadway repaving. We can look at, I think we could potentially put something like that under the update BPAC on the implementation of the ATP. We can potentially explore this would be in future CIPs. Is there a mechanism or an opportunity to have a funding source to do those types of projects? There was a request on the project tracking dashboard status. So I talked to Allison about that. And she indicated there is a larger citywide effort to have a project dashboard. So we would update under staff update when and if that gets developed. So we didn't add it to the work plan because it would just be a staff update. We had some questions on bike parking, so converting some street parking into secure bike walkers and then best practices for bicycle parking ordinances. We do have under the ATP policies and programs a recommendation to update the bike parking standards, so I think these two fit really nicely under that. A study session to compare students cycling education encouragement programs across local cities. We are going to be developing a Safe Routes to School program for adoption in the upcoming year. And so I think we can wrap. How do I want to say this? I don't think we're going to be doing a full on study session to do this, but certainly there will be some looking at how different cities are implementing their education and their encouragement programs and how they're being or not being effective. and that can get wrapped into the development of the program. I also want to mention that the Santa Clara County Public Health Department does convene quarterly meetings with San Francisco school providers, Mountain View participates, and this type of cross-agency evaluation is completely in their wheelhouse. So we can reach out to the county public health department and see if they have something moving forward, some information. perhaps they would even have a webinar or something we can invite the BPAC to. So I think there's opportunities to provide, to rely on other agency efforts to give the BPAC some of this information that doesn't fully burden staff, because this would be a lot to put together a full . All right, the last two. I think these two we were able to flip in specifically. So coordinate with city departments and advisory bodies and other jurisdictions within the county and other agencies on pedestrian and bicycling matters. So we already have item G in the work plan, and we added a bullet talking about better communication and coordination between commissions. So if you are interested in having conversations with individual members of other city committees, we can certainly make introductions and start having, you can have those informal conversations. And we can look into if there's an opportunity, if there makes sense to have some sort of joint meeting. I don't think in our recent past we are aware of a joint meeting that's happened. All right, and then last was a request to share more opportunities to volunteer at city-led education encouragement events and also include some more walking events. So we did add to the list the walk to school day that we host. And so if we have other walking related opportunities, we'll certainly make those aware to this committee. So that said, that summarizes what you see in the work plan. And this is the recommendation. The work plan is in your packet. And I guess that's the end of my presentation.

Is there anything notable to share on the TAL?

I think one thing I'd like to point out on the TAL is that our next meeting would be on the 18th, which is a little bit of a shift there. And we appreciate you guys working with us there. There are some... meetings that are lighter or don't have anything quite on the agenda yet. So we'll continue to populate that or cancel if not. Is there anything else? Oh, we did add a column for consent information and action to kind of give you guys an idea of what we're envisioning. If there's something you're thinking differently, we're open to that. That's it.

Do we have any questions on the draft work? Do you have any comments from members of the public on the draft work? Do we have any public comments online regarding the draft work? Okay. And I guess we'll move to any feedback, comments, and a motion will be in order for accepting, or is it accepting the draft work plan? Is it recommending it to council? Whatever, or accepting the staff recommendation or otherwise.

Oh, I'm sorry. I should put that back up.

Actually, sorry, I did have a different question. Will the slides from both this and from the PD presentation, will any of those be shared or made available after the meeting or just in the recording?

After the fact. It's about the slides. It's part of the attachment to the meeting, and it's when people just let you start. Oh, and let you start, yeah.

Okay, thank you. Okay. You asked us for some requests.

I did first.

Yeah, I was just saying, I appreciated doing some of those advanced kinsmen, but I think that's made this more... a bit more useful than some prior years when we tried to have a discussion about this. Obviously, not everything got committed to, but I think that hopefully that represents some sense of what I think members are interested in hearing about that.

And I will say it's helpful, too, as we get into our CIP year, knowing where you'd like to see time and what comes back.

Yeah, and I'll note a couple of those are things I've heard BPAC members, whether myself or others, ask for multiple times over the years. Having a consistent dashboard of ongoing projects has been a request for longer than I've been on BPAC. It's in the works.

We're working. I don't know exact timing on that, but it's... not as easy as we would like it to be, but we are working through it.

I think we figured that out from people asking for it. So I provided some context there. I know I've heard in the past requests for more discussions with parks because so many of our trails and critical infrastructure on parks. I know I was personally interested in getting more projects built so that we can get more happening quickly. And that goes to the TVA3 funding or other interest, but I'm happy to accept the staff recommendation.

So we need a motion.

A motion, a second, and a vote.

So I move that we approve both the drafts. Fiscal year 26-27, and tentatively adopt. Tentative agenda.

Second. I can second that. Okay. And all in favor vote aye. Aye. Great. Passes unanimously with three votes approved. Great. And I believe that moves us to item 7.1 of staff comments.

Right. So we do have a presentation. Joy Houghton. Houghton. Peter Brown. on the route 237 middle field road interchange improvement and robert involved here too do you want me i can i can just open it yeah since i'm already up and i guess that's a there's a no sign i believe we're not expecting like Yes, it is.

Got it? Yes. I will. Thank you.

Good evening, Chair and committee members. My name is Joy Hawkins, Senior Civil Engineer, joined tonight by Robert Gonzalez, Principal Civil Engineer in Public Works, and we're here to present updates on the State Route 237 and Middlefield Road Interchange Improvement Project. To start with a little bit of background, Middlefield Road shown vertically on this slide in the north-south direction between Logue Avenue and the eastbound 237 off-ramp is very challenging due to the number and close proximity of signalized intersections in a relatively short stretch of roadway. This results in a high collision rate and a challenging environment for pedestrians and bicyclists. The intent of the project is to reduce collision conflicts and improve pedestrian and bicycle mobility and connectivity. This project started two decades ago, starting in 2005. Whoopsie, sorry. Where am I going? In 2005, when Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, or VTA, solicited city support regarding highway projects in their Valley Transportation or VTP Valley Transportation Plan or VTP 2023, which includes the State Route 237 and Middlefield Road interchange. CalTrans approved the project study report that included this same interchange in 2013, and up to this date, the project was theoretical with no funding available for the subsequent phases. until 2019 when City Council approved the Capital Project, the State Route 237, and Middlefield Road Interchange Improvements Project and appropriated $5.5 million of the community benefit funds received from the first phase of a development project in the area and authorized execution of a funding agreement with VTA for project management services for the project approval and environmental document and final design phases of the project. In 2020, VTA initiated the project and developed preliminary alternatives. And since then, the project initiation Since project initiation, the project team has been in coordination with Caltrans since the project impacts their right of way and operation to gain approval prior to starting the final design phase. And to set the stage, Middlefield Road is a four lane roadway with four signalized intersection space approximately 300 feet apart in the project area between Logue Avenue and the eastbound 237 off ramp, which contributes to a high rate of broadside collisions. In particular, the collision rate at the westbound 237 middle field and frontage road intersection exceeds the statewide average for an intersection of this type. The 237 intersection operates as a partial interchange, only having an eastbound off ramp and a westbound on ramp compared to a full interchange with on and off ramps in both directions with the other interchange movement happening at the partial interchange at Maud Avenue. There are continuous bike tube, class two bike lanes and four to six foot wide sidewalks on both sides of Middlefield Road within the project limits. And then east of Middlefield Road sidewalks, the class two bike lanes do exist along the north and south side of the westbound and eastbound frontage roads respectively. And the project area is located near the Westman Light Rail Station shown at the top of the page and is significantly constrained for bikes and peds with the Caltrain corridor acting as a north-south barrier while the 237 acts as an east-west barrier. The project objectives and goals include reducing the frequency and severity of collisions along Middlefield Road between Logue and the eastbound 237 off-ramp intersections, improving pedestrian and bicycle accommodations and access, enhancing accessibility and connectivity to transit, strengthening connections to local roadways and planned developments in the area, and optimizing the use of the existing right-of-way. In 2020, the project team completed the preliminary investigative phase of the project to support the development and analysis of the alternatives. The alternatives were reviewed and scored by the project team and VTA and Caltrans bike ped subject matter experts based on categories including pedestrian and bicycle improvements, safety, environmental, traffic operations, right of way, and geometrics. The criteria categories were weighed based on their alignment with the goals and objectives of the project and based on various reasons such as Caltrans disapproval of a new connection to their main line. Some of those alternatives were eliminated and staff is recommending alternative three. The conceptual design for the staff recommended alternative, alternative three shown on the screen here, Joelle Panza- includes the following improvements installation of traffic calming features along the westbound frontage road, including race mediums pavement markings radar feedback signs. Joelle Panza- landscaping in narrow travel lanes construction of class for bike ways and widening sidewalks along the westbound frontage road between middle field road and MOD avenue. installation of class four bikeways and six foot wide sidewalks on Middlefield Road, and protected intersection improvements at the intersection of Ferguson, westbound 237 on-ramp, and the eastbound 237 off-ramp. In addition, this alternative includes what we refer to as technology improvements at the intersection And they include signal interconnect, signal timing optimization, and modified traffic signal operations with separate phases for bikes and peds. These improvements will help reduce vehicle speed, improve visibility, and predictability of bicycle and pedestrian crossings, and reduce exposure areas and conflicts between turning vehicles and vulnerable road users. With the completion of the biodiversity and urban forest plan, the project team will look for opportunities for inclusion of landscaping and green stormwater in the project and continue in the final design. The project is currently in the project approval environmental document or PAED phase, which is anticipated to be completed by the end of this year. This phase will be followed by the final design phase expected to begin next year and conclude in summer of 2028, which will be followed by a two-year construction period. The project cost for the staff-recommended alternative is $24.8 million, as summarized on the screen. The project is fully funded through final design utilizing Measure B, VTA Measure B funds and city community benefit funds. The project budget includes a total of $22.5 million in VTA Measure B Highway Program funds. This combined with the city funds is sufficient to support the construction of the project. Staff did present the project update and the staff recommended alternative to the CTC just last week on June 16, 2026 and the CTC recommended that the city council approve the staff recommended design concept for the project. As our next step, staff will forward a recommendation to city council for approval of the recommended alternative in fall of 2026. And once approved by city council, staff will proceed into final design upon completion of the PAED fee. And that concludes my presentation.

And is this the extent of the sort of staff presentation section?

I will have to understand two very quick things. So you can have the conversation about this item and then at the end.

If we have any brief questions, since it's not sort of a normally scheduled item, it's just an update, right?

If you could show this diagram here. So I have one question. I see that there is kind of a safety island at the crosswalk at the bottom, but not that you are on top. I'm wondering why it's missing.

What I'm noticing is that there are left turn movements at the top and the middle islands versus the bottom one doesn't have the left turn movements going northbound. So it may be to accommodate those turns.

From Ferguson to North, or not North, but onto Middlefield?

Off Middlefield.

Off Middlefield.

Yes. Because what's on the bottom left here is an eastbound off-ramp, so it's only going in one direction. No left turns into that roadway from Middlefield Road.

So you know who else having the safety I don't know?

It may be hard to accommodate those turning movements if there were refuge islands, but that's something we can take a look at.

It just caught my eye. And then the other thing too is that you mentioned that one of the reasons for this project is that there were lots of broadside type of crashes. I have to assume that some of them are because people are right on red. And I'm wondering if that would be a good opportunity to ban those. Because that's a dangerous maneuver when you have that many lines and speed. It's a very car-centric stretch of road.

A lot of the vehicular conflicts that were identified are just a combination of vehicular speeds and I think driver behavior with the closely spaced signal life intersections. The improvements are meant to address lowering vehicle speeds at the intersection and also shortening those crossing distances for bikes and pets. But if There are desires for no turn on right. That's something we can bring up. These intersections are owned and operated by Caltrans, so they would be subject to Caltrans approval.

Anyway, my preference would be to have no right on right anywhere, because that's a way it works. It's much safer.

And you said the plumbing is coming from the 2016 Metropique Highway.

Highway, because this is an interchange project.

said i wanted to make sure i did that correctly and that yeah i think he didn't call it out here but i believe this is the literally the intersection that has the highest number of like vehicle fatalities in the city or something like that in division zero our local road safety plan it is quite high i don't know if it was the highest but it was yes yes substantial yeah so it's it's yeah i think it's actually I think these will reduce vehicle space. And I think it's significant. Did I interpret the staff report to CTC correctly that it's significant? Are there questions for people running red lights just straight to the intersection?

Due to red light violations.

Yeah. And not like turning, right?

It's just people just driving straight through. You're trying to make a light. Going back to the median comment, I would just add that along with looking at incorporating a median island or Refuge Island. The other design alternative that is also looked at is simply giving pedestrians a longer green light to cross the intersection so they're not stuck in the bus. We don't get pedestrians having to wait through an entire cycle. So that's another design accommodation. It's a little bit different than El Camino because El Camino is so preferential to volume going up and down El Camino. Those crossings can be very long. This one here, we have a little bit more latitude to complete.

There might be also something that could occur there that has happened on the camino is that sometimes the lights go on the fritz and that's pretty much, you pretty much have to do a two-step crossing by foot if you're crazy enough to have to do it. But it's, there's no way to cross in one sitting because... When the lights don't work, it's pretty much a four-way stop. Yes.

So this project does include updating, as Joy mentioned, the technology. So hopefully we won't have those same considerations.

We will make sure that the pedestrian phase is accommodated with the appropriate amount of time. Can we know that happened?

twice in a row. And that was not fun at all.

That's an electrical or what happened there, but upgrading the signals will help. Make sure that we've got the right

And my one other clarifying question was just on the cost. I know in the CTC bin, but I think I may have emailed you about it. There was some numbers that maybe I just, they mapped different things than I expected. I saw some spots were returned to 3CET, construction costs at 2.4 million. And then the table you showed had like construction costs was 11 point something and the total was 24. Was I, that confused me. Yeah.

I don't recall if it was two or three million, but that was the original, that was the cost for the original alternative three, which only considered the cost of technology only improvements. When the other alternatives were eliminated, we refined alternative three and included improvements, bike pit improvements along Middlefield Road, as well as the westbound frontage road, because that was part of one of the conflicting movements that was creating the higher than statewide average conflicts at the intersection. So that's where we have the 11 point something million construction costs and the 24.8 includes design costs and right-of-way and other things.

Okay, thank you. You got anything else? I'm just curious here. There's no right turn of breath. Is that just... It's just only existed or only based on you guys' likeness that it should be there only because bicycles are riding? Or is it common to going to be for the future?

I'm going to try and interpret. So I think the question is, when do we apply no right on red?

Yeah.

And so that is one of the policies that we have put forth in the transportation plan. And we will further evaluate a more a metric for what we look at as we add signage and enforcement for no right on red. No right on red is... can be safer for pedestrians, bicycles, and vehicles. So we'll have to look at all that. It's based on speed, but it also can change traffic patterns. So all of that will have to be evaluated at location. So it's not a blanket. We can put it everywhere. We will have to evaluate on a case-by-case basis. And as part of the ETP, we're going to come up with some sort of more scientific method of how we apply that signage. So the study is going to be done on paper, I think.

Should we move to the remainder of our presentation?

Thank you.

So, two updates.

First one, I wanted to provide an update on the community shuttle service.

Okay. And I'm going to read. So the shuttle services for Mountain View Community Shuttle and MVGO have been suspended since June 18th due to the expiration of the Shuttle Operator's California Public Utilities Commission License, CPUC. The Shuttle Operator DriveU is taking steps to restore their state certification. The Mountain View Transportation Management Association who manages the shuttle operator does not have a firm date for when the shuttle services will be restored. Per the Mountain View Transportation Management Association, Uber vouchers are available to riders due to the service disruption. Uber vouchers for shuttle riders are only usable for trips within Mountain View and during the shuttle service operating hours. And that is the completeness of the information I have for you. I also wanted to mention that the Council Neighborhoods Committee meeting is happening tomorrow night, serving the Ringstorf shoreline. San Antonio. San Antonio community. It will be held at the Redwood Room Mountain View Community Center at 6.30 p.m. This is an opportunity for community members to ask questions of staff and have staff answer those questions live and in person.

Those are my two staff updates.

I'm wondering how an operator can use the license, but it's not a good question for you. Yeah, there will be a full postmortem once we're back on and running.

Yes.

People must be happy about this. All right.

Then do we have any public comments on any of the staff report? Anything online? No? No. All right. And there's no action required? I guess any. Okay. And we'll move to item 7.2, committee comments. So I will provide the update

I have your slides. Let me open them up. I thought I had your slides.

There were two meetings since our prior meeting, since we did not, I believe, have a May meeting. My memory is gone.

Oh, my gosh. Okay. I don't want to. Hold on a second. Oh, it did. Okay. This is actually good because I'm I'm going into Teams to get the slides, and I just didn't want to. There it is.

Oh, never mind.

I'll do it. I can do it.

I can just give this carefully.

We will figure out the technology for the next meeting. We'll do a practice run through, figure out how to do this. OK. So I have it open. Can I actually move it? Oh.

All right. So at the May BTA meeting, there were a variety of items. I tried to call out the interesting ones here. They included an update on the congestion management program reporting on consent, which is interesting because there's some funding for the BTA to maintain level of service standards regarding congestion, even though other aspects of state law have made it so that there's less reliance on the whole service standards. I'm not actually entirely clear myself on how much flexibility VTAE has to define those standards itself. There's also an update on some of the OBAC 3 funded projects, including our, I believe, our Moffitt and Middlefield projects, which are receiving OBAC 3. There's another SB 63 refers to the transit sales tax ballot measure, which I'm not actually sure if it's officially qualified for the ballot in November yet, but I believe it's expected to because they submitted a large number of signatures. And SB 63 is not as immediately relevant for active transportation infrastructure projects since it's mostly focused on transit itself, transit obviously. tends to interact well with active transportation. And most of the BPAC input on that was encouraging the focus on overall transit service levels, like running lots of buses and trains and transit speed, things like transit signal priority, which is indeed a lot of the focus of the draft. There are some items in the local funding plan about innovation-based programs, though, that are not necessarily just focused on the service itself and we're focused on exploring new technology. There is then an update on a very preliminary, or not a finalized thing related to the Persona Corridor, which is a rail corridor that serves the Permanente Quarry. Permanente Quarry is shutting down, so the rail line has less need to exist, but it turns out that it'll actually still exist for a while, because the part itself of the Valley Face 2 extension is actually using the rail corridor for dumping dirt from the tunnels. far as from what i understand um but so we're going to dump it i think so i didn't ask i i think it was mentioned at the meeting but my memory is not serving me quite well enough right now that's a project special i don't know and there was some discussion at the prepack meeting about whether it would make more sense whether it's we should be preserving the rail corridor for transit in spots where the right way is really narrow and not trying to actually decommission the rail line entirely. But that was not really the VTAB best call to make. So as I said, that project is very, if you're interested in it, go look up the project. And the next slide. The June meeting was a special meeting for reviewing OBAC IV Complete Streets Checklists like we did earlier in this meeting, but for any cities or projects that were not able to make it to their city-specific VPEX. So we had 13 total items, I believe, and we just ran through them as quickly as we could. It helps that there is a batch of five projects for each of the county expressways for doing feasibility studies on class one bike paths along those corridors. And then there are a variety of others listed there, some of all of which are in slightly different stages. I will say one of the things that made many of the checklists weaker was that some of them lacked the detail to even make it clear what the scope of the project was when you were reading the checklist. or the checklist plus the attachments that were provided in the meeting. And some of the projects also seemed like they were delayed or put in infrastructure that was less old age and abilities due to community input. There was a relatively interesting one in the case of Saratoga-Smithdale Road where the staff specifically referenced not putting in vertical delegation due to some local that is a corridor that is currently primarily used for recreational services, which was interesting to hear, so I colored it out here. And I'd say the best-looking applications were generally those that seemed like they would be most likely to get to construction quickly, had well-defined scopes so you knew what was going to happen when the project happened, and which also clearly focused on safety improvements rather than I don't know, being a bigger project that only had safety or things such as a small piece of it. I guess the ADA transition plan actually was a strong one that wasn't necessarily safety improvements per se, but actually I thought it was a very strong project because it had its own scope. Yeah. And I think Lauren's assessment of our projects earlier is probably fair in terms of where we're standing relative to what at least I've seen. We have some good projects in our OPAG applications, but there's a lot of other projects out there. So we'll see. But also how you fill out the grant application clearly does matter.

To give grace to the applicants, the timeline.

Oh, yes.

The timeline for filling out the Fleet Streets checklist was kind of very short. Yeah. Because... I think the application, it was just a few weeks, like three weeks or something.

Yes. We also heard mentions that apparently the MTC portal was actually very difficult to use. So there was, it sounds like literally it was difficult to go in and reword things or revise things.

Oh, interesting. Okay.

That may have varied by applicant.

I don't know. I think it might have varied by applicant. I haven't had those issues, but I... It does take for that. Thank you. Yes, you're like, plan for it. And we will. I think MTC is understanding what it means to review and accommodate. I don't know. What do you think? 200, 250 projects? Because the whole nine... county Bay Area that's applying for the projects going through that portal in a very short amount of time.

They I mean, it was self inflicted.

Yeah, maybe on purpose. Yeah. The San Jose project that's listed there. I think that was a situation where Santa felt we drew most of their future effects with the therapy pack. But then this project, they realized last minute, they wanted to apply for funding because it's a good opportunity. So they sent it to the BTAB pack and That would include very little detail on that in the checklist. I suspected that I suspect that's the way they made the week or a few days before basically to do it. Anyways, they'll fill out.

They'll fill out by the time they're due.

Were there any questions on VTV? I've been surprised about the expressways contracts.

I mean, we're very like for. It's for feasibility studies, so it's a very early stage. It was a explore class one bike pass along.

Oh, OK.

So it's to provide bike and pedestrian improvement on Expressway.

I thought it was just like funding a new Expressway. Yeah, sorry.

I did not make that clear in my mind. So it was for bike and pad projects.

And then to the extent that DTA can propose projects and they are the ones deciding, do they get

So the way I've participated in several of the scoring committees at VTA, and if your jurisdictions project comes up, you refuse yourself. You don't even speak about the project and you often will leave the room or leave Zoom. And so you will not actually score or have the ability to defend your project. And that's for, they do that for any of them.

So that's at the MTC that are, you know,

Well, that's at the first. Yeah, VTA does the first round of scoring, and so they'll convene a scoring group to do the work, and they'll ask people to recuse themselves from their projects.

Remind me, though, usually when VTA has it, it's not made up of only VTA staff. Oh, yeah, sorry. We've had staff from Mountain View who have participated as scoring members of grant applications. So when our grants go in, they can't score ours just like BTA members can't score theirs. But it is made up of all of the county representative bodies.

That makes sense.

That was the key thing that I didn't, yeah, I should have clarified. You were completely right. They request volunteer staff to do it.

So we try, as Mountview, we try and put somebody on there. Okay. I can do it.

It's actually really excellent if you're ever getting into transportation as a career. It's a really excellent way to sort of see how grant applications can be done really well and not so well.

And then it helps us as we move forward. We know what our college is.

Is the majority Republican or Democrat?

All right. Is there any Are there any other committee updates regarding things in the community or such?

Yeah, I had one. I think I heard that there was a big grant that the city got for both housing and transportation. And I'm not sure if you have details on what the transportation was.

I do, and I don't have them right in front of me, so I want to be careful. I believe you're referring to the ASICS grant that we received.

It is a large grant.

It is for a development on a city-owned property that will be primarily low income. I believe we are using some of that money for middle field but i'm not i'm here we'd have to go back and look but basically yeah um the way it worked is it had to be a project within a half mile radius of the development and we got additional points in the grant application for adding um Amy Dabbs, bus stops, so I think we added there's several bus stops being added there's a couple shuttle stops being added as well, and then it. Amy Dabbs, aligns with a bike project we already had as part of our CIP so that helps on some of our funding for other projects now that that frees up so.

Gareth J. The housing is on Evelyn so.

Amy Dabbs, It is, it is on Evelyn that is correct yeah.

I guess, procedurally, any members of the public online to comment on this committee comments? No? Okay. With that, we will move to item eight. The date and time of the next meeting is August 18th, Tuesday, which is abnormal. So make sure that's on your calendars. We then have additional meetings in September and future months as normal. And with that, we are adjourned at 8.40 p.m.

Great, thank you.

Very good job on the typing. Thank you.