Airport Commission - Regular Meeting

Alright. Welcome everybody to the first Transportation Environment Committee Meeting for the year 2025. We will start with roll call. I wanna welcome our newest members, council members Campos and Salas. I know I don't think council member Salas will be on our roll call yet, but he will be observing today from his future seat up here. So go ahead and do roll call.

Campos? Present. Ortiz?

Present.

Vice chair Foley? Here. Chair Cohen? Here. You have a quorum.

Thank you. We are going to start with item d one, the report on the city infrastructure, quarterly update. Erica, are you okay. Go ahead, Erica. Thank you.

Just wait for the slides to come on up. Okay. Okay. Good afternoon, transportation and environment committee and members of the public. Erica Garofo, lead resilience strategist.

Okay. So just as a reminder, since we have some new folks on the committee, in July 2024, the city of San Jose completed the first year of our city infrastructure strategy. With the completion of the first year, the strategy has refined to better align with new opportunities, evolving needs, and the fiscal year twenty twenty four, twenty twenty five operating capital budget operating and capital budgets. The five updated objectives that now make up our strategy are climate ready and climate smart, modern and sustainable mobility, clean energy resilience, water resilience, and natural environment This updated infrastructure strategy streamlines the city's focus adding new work streams and adjusting existing ones to maintain momentum while addressing emerging priorities. The 19 updated and new work streams supporting these five objectives as illustrated are as illustrated below.

The updated slate of work streams strengthens collaboration across our city departments and builds on partnership with external agencies like Valley Water and respective departments develop their committed key results for each initiative within the city infrastructure strategy. At the end of the quarter, we evaluate each work stream on completing their planned key results and assign an overall rating of green, yellow or red. I'm happy to report that in the second quarter of this fiscal year, 11 work streams finished green or 58%, eight were yellow, 42%, and we had zero reds. Today, I'll dive into three of these work streams to give a quick update on work to date. So starting first with the shoreline levee and sea level rise.

As a reminder, the Valley Water South San Francisco Bay Shoreline Levee Project, which is a mouthful, is a comprehensive flood protection, habitat restoration, and climate adaptation initiative designed to address the long term risks of sea level rise and flooding in Santa Clara County. Our partnership with Valley Water focuses on North San Jose, including the Elviso neighborhood and protecting the regional wastewater facility lands. In October, the city convened an in person working group with the Santa Clara Valley Water District, the California State Coastal Conservancy, and the City of Santa Clara to outline key deal points for a memorandum of understanding related to the shoreline levee project. Over the remainder of this past quarter, Valley Water and the City of San Jose staff developed a 30% draft of the MOU. The MOU is based on the fully executed shoreline levy letter of intent between the city of San Jose, city of Santa Clara, and Valley Water.

The goal for this current quarter, is to, develop 70% of the draft MOU.

Next, we'll touch on

the airport asset preservation plan. The goal of this plan is to ensure the long term functionality, safety and efficiency of Mineta San Jose International Airport by strategically maintaining, improving and modernizing its infrastructure. The airport, in this past quarter, the airport engaged a consultant to develop an airport asset preservation plan and this work included interviewing key personnel at San Jose Airport to evaluate asset conditions, ongoing and planned projects, and the current infrastructure status. They also reviewed documents and data to analyze the infrastructure systems of Terminals A And B. They completed a visual facility condition assessment of both terminals and they prepared a draft findings report to the city detailing the current state of the terminal infrastructure and proposing a rough order of magnitude level capital investment plan.

And lastly, they prepared a comprehensive final investment plan. And our last work stream that we'll touch on today is citywide building electrification. The building electrification program aims to accelerate the transition to an all electric building to all electric buildings, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and supporting the city's climate action goals for a sustainable and resilient future. Buildings account for 31% of San Jose's greenhouse gas emissions, primarily due to natural gas usage. Gas water heaters and HVAC systems are responsible for over 90% of natural gas uses in residential homes.

So replacing these systems will have the largest impact on home emission reductions. Switching to electric appliances also improves indoor air quality since natural gas appliances can release carbon monoxide, formaldehyde, and other harmful pollutants. San Jose Clean Energy this past quarter launched a program for residential customers incentivizing the installation of heat pumps for water and space heating called Eco Home Rebate and marketed it to electric homes San Jose waitlist customers. Staff also introduced the San Jose Clean Energy on bill financing pilot, which is called the Eco Home payment plan to help offset the cost of electric home upgrades. The completion status for all of our q two individual key results within each of these work streams is detailed in appendix a of our accompanying memo.

The in progress January through March '3 three key results are also detailed in the memo in appendix b. We will be back in May for our next update. Kip, back to you to close.

That's all that we have, and we are open for any questions or feedback from the committee.

Thank you so much. We'll start with public comment. Do we have any today?

Not for this item.

Okay. Thank you so much. Members of the committee, anybody have any questions? No questions. Well, I have questions. I always have questions. First on the levy, I mean we know that the, you know, what two of the five, is it two of the five or three of the five reaches, I forget which one, been, they are under construction and will be completed but we need the rest to be done. The feedback I had been getting was that because of the source of this funding, we were probably not at risk like some other projects are of the federal government cutting off the next round for the next part of the project. Do we have a better feel for that in terms of the project being able to move forward?

Yeah. My understanding is that the federal funds for this are secured and there's a substantial local contribution. And so as you know sort of the missing piece is making sure that they have all of the land which is the land that we own to do it and doing value engineering so that the local share is not overly burdensome for Valley Water. But the federal amount is capped and set and I believe I have not heard any indication that it is at risk in any way.

Okay, thank you. So we're still on track in terms of the next phase after this one is complete with moving forward? Yes. Remind me again of what on track means in terms of the timeline?

Well, if we can come to an agreement with Valley Water on this transaction and the final alignment, then we should be able to execute that transaction. There's Pond A-eighteen which is about eight sixty acres is required to be transferred to Valley Water to complete the levy reach and we are looking at value engineering options with them and the Army Corps of Engineering. Assuming that we come to an agreement on all of that, then that gives them the green light to proceed with construction which would take another couple of years. But the intent is that that would protect us from both coastal flooding and sea level rise for the next fifty or sixty years. So it's, if we can get this done within the next six months or so, that thing is well on track to be built out in the next several years.

So we should know this year whether we're moving forward, whether that deal is made and what the next

Yes and we've had some meetings with them subsequent to this report and we believe we have a track forward. There's a lot of technicalities in the environmental side that we need to walk very closely with both the Water Board and the Army Corps on, but we're confident that we can come to an agreement that is mutually beneficial and that we can execute.

Okay, thank you. On the electrification portion, it's great that last year we launched the programs, particularly the rebates. And I think we've probably seen this at another time. What are the numbers of people? I mean, were already people on a wait list, right, that were asking for it. So if we do we know how many people so far have gotten the rebate and how much money is left in the rebate program for the rest of the year?

I'd ask either Julie or Lori to join us down and let us know if they have the answer to that. If not we can follow-up and get back. Lori Mitchell is making her way to the podium, acting director of Environmental Services Department and also got a foot in the clean energy world.

Britt Mitchell, acting director of ESD. It's a great question. So we just launched this program so there's plenty of capacity available right now. I don't have the specific numbers on how many have applied. But I do know, just looking at the monthly numbers last month, that there was still a lot of capacity in the program.

So as far as potential people to there's still a list of people who had signed up for this in the past. I thought I heard there was a wait list. Is that right?

Yeah. Just to explain that a little bit better. So there was a program managed by the Environmental Services Department the Climate Smart. And so San Jose Clean Energy first marketed to those customers that had signed up and put their hand up that they want to electrify. But the program is open citywide.

It's open

to anybody now. And how is it being what are the avenues by which it's being promoted to potential

users?

Yeah. So, there's a number you know, we're going to community meetings, a number of social media as well, and other events in the community. So certainly would love to partner with any of the council offices. And if you are having events in your neighborhoods, we'd love to push that program out to the community.

Great. And I think it also would be great for newsletters and other purposes. If you have updated marketing information about the program, that would be great. Can you just spend one minute, since you're here, Laurie, describing the other portion of this, which was the billing installment plan portion and how that works and whether you've seen people taking advantage of that at this point?

Sure. That's a brand new program that we're very proud of. So on bill financing is pretty common in the utility industry. It was used a lot for energy efficiency upgrades where if you wanted to install an energy efficient appliance but didn't have the capital cost for that, the utility will front you the money for that and then you pay it back on your utility bill. So, we know that building electrification, water heaters and HVAC equipment can be very expensive and cost prohibitive for many consumers.

So one way to allow them to electrify those homes is to allow them to finance it on their utility bill. And so we're piloting this. We want to see how it works. Other CCAs have done it and they found that people are repaying, that the default is very low. So we're comfortable trying this out and seeing if there's a benefit for our community.

Great. I'd love to do some kind of program. I know in my district maybe others would too, where we can explain this to the public so people can take advantage of it and know that this isn't going to break the bank if they make these conversions. When I met with PG and E most recently, I know they're building somewhere in their downtown headquarters, a demonstration facility for electrified homes. So I hope they're they'll be complete soon. It'd be great for us to partner with them and use that as an as an avenue to show people what it looks like to electrify your home and what the appliances are like. And so I don't know if your department's in communication with them about that or not, but that would be great.

Yeah. No, definitely. I think we're very interested in that. That's a huge benefit for the community to see how these technologies actually work in a home before they look into purchasing one and getting a contractor and all that. So we're very supportive of that.

Great. Thank you so much. Those are my questions. Do we have a motion to adopt the report? Move for approval. Second. All right. Looks like we have no other comments, so let's move to a vote. I think think Councilmember Campos didn't sign in early enough so she can do a voice vote on this item. Just I or Nae?

A, I, sorry.

Or yes or no?

Yes, Campos.

Alright. So we have three on the screen and and Campos, yes, that's a four zero vote. So the report is accepted. Can can somebody just check her screen? Oh, is it logged in now? Okay. I think it's good. Thank you. Alright. We're on to our second item. This is our climate adaption and resiliency plan status report. Well, we talk I talk a lot, obviously, about climate mitigation. The other half of this, the important part other important part is our climate, resilience and adaptation plans so that we can make sure that we are ready for the effects of climate change. So excited to hear this report. Looks like Julie's in in the box. So kick us off.

Good afternoon. Julie Benabente, deputy director for the Climate Smart Division in the Environmental Services Department. I'm joined by Michael Gonzalez, who's our environmental program manager in environmental services. Today, we're gonna be providing an update on the city's climate adaptation and resilience plan. So we're gonna start with a project overview.

We'll walk through the progress and timeline for this project as well as, our planned community engagement. As background for this project, the city adopted its climate smart plan, which focuses on reducing community wide greenhouse gases in 2018. The climate smart plan noted that climate adaptation resiliency planning should be completed since San Jose even with increased greenhouse gas reduction efforts is likely to encounter increasing climate change impacts like droughts, wildfires, changing weather, and sea level rise. In 2023, the city secured approximately $650,000 in state funding to develop a climate adaptation and resiliency plan, And a climate adaptation and resiliency plan will complement the city's climate smart plan by focusing on the impacts of climate change and how we can address the city's vulnerabilities to enhance resilience for critical infrastructure and vulnerable communities. Starting in December 2024, the environmental services department took over the climate adaptation plan efforts from the city manager's office.

And supporting this effort, we currently have, our ESD lead staff, Michael next to me, as well as consultants to conduct technical analysis and community engagement. And we also have a climate ready working team which meets regularly and includes city departments as well as Valley Water staff. In terms of our progress to date, and this has included securing our consultant through the city's procurement process forming the climate ready working team, which I mentioned, to provide review and input throughout the process. Also drafting key guidance documents, the vision framework and community engagement plan, which was attached to the T and E memo, as well as completing a climate vulnerability assessment, a technical assessment, giving us a clear picture of the risks facing our critical infrastructure and populations to help inform future measures, for stakeholder input. In the vulnerability assessment, which looks at how climate change impacts San Jose's population infrastructure and critical systems.

It focused on the risks associated with rising temperature, flooding, and wildfires. And here are a few of the key key findings. Flooding, would disrupt critical facilities like fire stations and hospitals as well as our transport transportation networks. Roads, public transit, and EV charging stations are particularly vulnerable to extreme weather and wildfire impacts in certain groups such as low income households, mobile home residents, and individuals with health sensitivities face disproportionate risk from heat, air quality, and flooding. Based on these findings, San Jose's climate adaptation resiliency plan will focus on facility assessments, infrastructure upgrades, community engagement, and targeted resilience measures to address these vulnerabilities.

So in terms of our project timeline through January 20 through the January 2026 grant term, Currently and through June 2025, staff will continue working with the consultant to complete initial community engagement as well as coordinating with the working group to develop the draft adaptation measures. From July to October 2025, staff will gather public input on the draft climate adaptation plan, and in winter twenty twenty five or 2026, we'll present the proposed plan to the Transportation Environment Committee as well as city council for consideration. In terms of our, tactics for community engagement, some of our community engagement through June 2025 includes holding small group meetings with groups like the city's youth commission, which we recently completed, as well as, the Elviso neighborhood group, hosting a first public workshop, launching a dedicated website, and also presenting on progress to the city's climate advisory commission. From July through September 2025, we'll post the public review draft of the adaptation plan for review and comment, host public workshops, and participate in multilingual community pop up events to ensure broad outreach and gather input, address questions, and refine our plan based on community feedback. Between January 2026, staff intends to present, as I mentioned, to TNE and city council, and pending city council approval, we'll be able to post to online dashboard to track adaptation and resilience metrics along with our regular Climate Smart metrics.

So clearly, we're we have a lot more work to do. This is just an interim update in the meantime, and our recommendation is to accept our update on the status and the report on the status of the climate adaptation and resiliency plan. We'll open for questions.

Thank you. Do we have any public comment on this item?

Yes. We have two speaker cards. Diane and Jordan, please make your way down to the podium. You will have two minutes to speak.

Good afternoon. My name is Diane Solomon, and I'm here on behalf of your BPAC. We number one, we respectfully request that you direct this team to work with your BPAC as you develop this plan. Please schedule time with us in the spring and winter with our staffer, Ryan Smith. Pedestrians and cyclists will be adversely impacted by more severe and frequent storms, heat waves, and wildfire smoke. To our cities, creeks are not resilient. Our members and the public tell us that storms flood them and fill them with dangerous mud conditions. We received a presentation and learned of a plan to develop a plan to develop storm safety on the Guadalupe River. Such plans should be made and put in place for all of our trails. Please don't base our creeks resilience resilience plan upon the one hundred year flood plain or the one hundred year also called the one hundred year flood Zone.

Our city must plan now for unprecedented deeper and more frequent flooding. Four, heat waves will be deadly when they reach a 100 plus degrees. Fast frequent public transit is both climate smart and climate resilient. Bus stops with shade will also add resilience and will be much needed in our underserved communities. More trees will cool off sidewalks and provide respite to pedestrians and cyclists. Five, e bikes and e scooters will help make it safer for people to choose active transportation during a dangerous heat wave. Please enable more public bike and scooter shares, as well as e bike subsidies for low income individuals, especially in our city's underserved areas. Thank you, and thank you for making San Jose a great place to live. Thank you. Next speaker.

Happy New Year. Welcome back. Congratulations to our new council members and to our new vice mayor Foley. My name is Jordan Muldau. I live in Japantown. I'm a resident of District 3. I am also a brand new member of the Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Committee along with Diane. So I echo all the points that Diane made. I helped her write that letter. Everything else I say is on behalf of myself.

So I'm excited for the adaptation plan. Climate change is here. It's not going away. We still need to try to fight it and roll it back, but we also need to be prepared for what is already locked in. So I'm glad that this is being worked on, and I'm excited to see the drafts and comment on them.

Adaptation is definitely different from mitigating climate change, but they also have a lot of common elements. So we want to encourage biking and walking in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but also we want to make sure that the people who have switched to biking and walking can continue to do so when there is a heat wave or when there's flooding. So we need to provide the best in class bikeways, not only for getting people out of their cars, but for keeping them out of their cars when the weather turns bad. So definitely need to address the flooding that happens in our trail underpasses, either for the light floods, making sure that there's better drainage, but for the heavier floods, making sure there's above grade ways to go around those obstacles. And again, just to echo, e bikes are fantastic.

I've been biking a ton more since I got an e bike and probably putting less car miles on the road due to that. So anything that we can do to encourage e bike adoption or using the existing e bike options would be great.

Thank you. Back to the committee.

Thank you for the public comment. Now on to councilor Ortiz.

Thank you, chair. I also wanna thank staff for their, hard work and great presentation. And, of course, preparing for, you know, what we all need to prepare for, of course, climate change. As the vulnerable as the vulnerability report details, we need special attention to the most vulnerable working families in San Jose and ensuring they remain safe in a changing climate. That's why I appreciate the special thought that was put into the community engagement plan and work that's already underway in engaging frontline communities.

Just wanted to follow-up on one component of that. Page four of the memo says that staff will be hosting a small group meeting this quarter with East San Jose community based organizations. I wanted to ask which community groups are you meeting with and when or if that meeting has already happened?

Those meetings haven't happened yet and actually So we have the outreach plan that we provided from our consultants kind of high level, so we actually have city templates that we typically use when we're drafting more detailed plans. So we're working on that currently, and so that's where we would identify the timing and which groups and everything. So we we don't have that actually worked out. But if you have particular suggestions, we'd love to hear those ahead of time.

Yeah. Of course. There's a lot of great organizations on the East Side and District 7 that serve, you know, workers and and the immigrant community, so I'd love to be able to connect you to some of those groups. So thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you for the for this report. It's really important. And and I know it is for we have all have parts of our districts, all of us on the council, that are particularly vulnerable. I know my district has a lot of different different areas that I'm worried about.

We have two rivers that flow through my district to North San Jose to the bay. We have Elviso, which we know is is a major concern in the North San Jose as sea level rises, a lot of North San Jose is vulnerable. That's why the last report that included the levee is really important as part of this plan. I also have the hills on the East Side, many of us do. There's a hills on the South as well, and I'm concerned a little bit about, how we're gonna be prepared for that the the what what will inevitably happen when fires are on the up in the wild lands in the undeveloped part of the city.

And I'm I wanted to ask, are we as part of this work going to look at the ways in and out of all the neighborhoods to make sure that there's multiple paths in and out in the case of a fire? And I'm gonna just point out one neighborhood in my district that at this point only it it's way up on top of the hill and there's only one road up and I've been very concerned. There was one there was a fire a couple years ago that went across Suncrest, just in some open space there, but the but the people in the neighborhood couldn't get out of the neighborhood. And if that fire had spread, there was nowhere to go. Are we are we thinking about that kind of improvement to some of our hillside neighborhoods?

Unless Julie wants to take it, think that's a bit outside the context of some of this work. So we are we do have an evacuation plan that that details that and does that work that's led by our police department in coordination with our fire department are the primary leads on that, working with the Office of Emergency Management. And I'm exactly aware of exactly the points that you're talking about, both the Alum Rock area, which is an area we pay a lot of attention to. And also the piece that we almost even had to evacuate during a series of wildfires a couple of years ago where you do have a very tight single egress and access. So at this point we don't have additional capital plans to build out additional roads, though we are doubling down and reviewing the evacuation plan and the planning piece to see where those choke points are because those are some of the most critical elements to take into account with wildfire risk.

Yeah and I'm not, obviously I don't know that we have to have a plan yet for Fayetteville building new roads, and this is maybe more detailed than for today's conversation. But just having a map that shows us where our choke points, are, where our problems are. There's potential for state funding. There is also potential not to build roads that would be used every day, but fire roads that can be used in the case of an emergency, right, without having to build major infrastructure. Infrastructure.

Yes and just a couple of things on that. The fire department in coordination with the Office of Emergency Management are deploying a new system called Genesis that allows by the company Zonehaven that allows them to do a much more detailed evacuation planning based on both the demographics of the area and real time integrated information with the event itself. And we'll be doing some testing of that capacity in February And I think we're scheduled for an April 3 session with the council as a whole on emergency preparation. And I think some of those capabilities will be demonstrated at a high level in that session as well.

Thank you. Just follow-up on one of the comments that Jordan made during a public comment. And I'm not sure this is necessarily a result of climate change just as much as poor design, but many of our bike routes are unimpassable in the in the winter. We have a bike route in my district that goes under six eighty that is flooded for whenever there's a wet rainy season it's pretty much unusable for three or four months. I know this is not necessarily completely city jurisdiction, it's a lot valley water jurisdiction, but we ought to be looking at I hope as part of this we'll be looking at how we can make sure that that infrastructure is better protected for everyday use, not just during major flooding events.

And then I just wanted to ask, so you you said this is coming back in the probably early twenty twenty six. Is that the time at which you're anticipating it will be ready?

Yes. Our the grant is through January 2026, so it'll probably either be, I'm thinking January or February 2026.

And during this process, as you're building this plan, will there be check-in points with members of the council, to make sure that, as council member Ortiz asked, the right groups are being talked about, that that all the issues that we might have in our own districts and neighborhoods are being studied?

Yeah. So I know for for the community engagement portion, we certainly will reach out, know, for for input on that portion to make sure we're reaching your constituents. The there weren't other than other some of the other commissions, there weren't other check ins planned for T and E before coming back. Okay. So

So not necessarily coming back to this committee as a whole until January, but perhaps maybe some kind of update. At least I would like it and maybe others would like to have an update like a briefing midway through with your your team?

Yeah. We'd happy to do that.

Yeah. Okay. Mhmm. Thank you. Councilmember Campos.

Thank you, chair, and thank you, to staff for the report. I, also wanted to uplift the wildfire impacts in District 2. We have our Basking Ridge neighborhood, which runs along Coyote Valley where there's a huge concern for wildfire safety. And so I am curious as to how the city's office of emergency management is planning to engage neighbors proactively to educate our residents about climate hazards, mitigations, and you know how to work with our city on that.

I'll bring Jay down, but while he's coming down I'll say a few things about that. We also have a parallel piece of of work around the fire resilience in particular, some of which will be coming out as an info memo. And the preparation piece falls in a couple of different parts of the city in terms of of the hardening and the wildland prep. But I'll bring Jay McAmus here to talk about some of the cert work that they do on some of the preparation and whether that includes or will be including any of the wildfire hardening work.

Okay. Thank you, chair and member, for

the

questions. This is something that we work really hard on in the office of emergency management. So a big part of our program is outreach and education for the public. As Kip just mentioned, one of the things that we've been pushing for a number of years now is the CERT program. So the CERT program is available in all 10 districts.

The program focuses on ensuring at least one full course is provided in each district every year, plus additional courses in language specific training. So that would be Vietnamese, Chinese, Spanish every year, and that's our our full curriculum for for the year. In addition, we do a number of what we call personal emergency preparedness events with groups of as few as a dozen to several dozen. I've seen a couple of groups in excess of a 100 people throughout the year. We average around 2,500 residents that we engage with at different events throughout the different communities.

In the six years I've been here, I am not aware that we have turned down a single request for an outreach event to any community. We're open to all takers whenever they would like and and set up an event where they'd like for us to come and talk about preparedness, resilience issues, and quite frankly, any question that they may have in that regard. Does that help?

Very helpful. Thank you.

Since you had the mic last, would you like to move acceptance of the report?

Yes. I'll move to accept the report.

Second. Alright. We have a motion and a second, so let's vote. Alright. That motion carries four zero. Thank you so much, Julie, and, thank you for the presentation. Alright. We are on to our citywide pavement status report update. We always look forward to hearing how well our, pavement program is is going. So here so John and team, look forward to your presentation.

Good afternoon, Chair. John Ristow, Director of Transportation. This afternoon, as the chair Cohen just stated, we're gonna do a presentation on the upcoming pavement program. And with me today is Jennifer Sagan, deputy director with the Department of Transportation Frank Varshidi, division manager of the program and

Annie.

Annie is Annie Yea is also here, our senior engineer. And I think I'm gonna just turn it over to Jennifer. She's gonna get started with the presentation.

Thank you, John. Jennifer Sagan, Deputy Director of Infrastructure Maintenance for Department of Transportation. So we're gonna advance here. So this first slide shows the pavement condition index and where we are for major streets and local street network. The PCI is set it's a measurement set by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission or MTC, and it allows jurisdictions to kinda give a rating for the how how well our streets are doing.

So you could see the major streets in 2024 was 78, we've gone down slightly in 2025 to '76. Local neighborhood network has gone up from 69 to 73 for an overall network number of 74. So we're improving. And our goal is to stay above 70 for the overall number. So moving on how we grade our street conditions.

The major streets consist of around nine sixty seven miles. The PCI you saw from the previous slide was 7668% of the streets in that area are actually the percentage. Yeah. Are good to excellent. That means that they're in the 70 to 100 range.

27% are at the at risk to fair. So that's up to fifty percent and fifty or 70%. Sorry about that. And then the DNF for a porta failed and only 5% are in that area. And then shifting to local streets, 1,500 miles approximately with a PCI of 73. 64% are in the good to excellent range. 21% are at the at risk to fare. And then we have 15% that are in the Portafield area, which we'll be focusing on as we move forward.

Okay.

So the pyramid here, I'm gonna start at the bottom and kinda work our way up and have you focus on the boxes to the right. So in the local street network, we estimate that it's going to cost around $34,400,000 annually to keep the streets in the, 70% range on average. And the backlog that we have there is around $247,000,000. And then moving up to the major streets, again, the annual need is 21,400,000.0 with a backlog of 65,700,000.0. And then summing it up altogether, 63,800,000.0 is what we anticipate we need to invest in our streets every year to keep them in the 70% 70 and above PCI rating.

The backlog total is 313,100,000.0. And moving on, I'm going to pass to Frank.

Thank you, Jennifer, and thank you for your time and attention. So I'll pick it up from here. So this is just historical data on our pavement condition index. So again, that index varies from zero to 100, 100 being excellent, brand new street or brand new pavement. So just historical data, how we have been progressing with our overall network.

So as Jennifer mentioned, we have a total of 4,400 lane miles or two thousand five hundred and nineteen thirty foot equivalent miles. So we have a pretty good sized network and changing that PCI takes a good amount of effort and work. So but we are on the right track. So as you can see, a couple of key points on this slide. 2019 is when we got into residential, repaving our residential with help from the VTA Measure B and also the Measure T that the city passed a few years ago.

So back then, our PCI was 66, we worked it up to 71 for example in 2023. And just this year when we finished all of our work that we did at the end of last year, we are at overall network PCI of 74. This slide is looking at our overall funding. So this is our ten year overall funding status. So just to give you, again, a picture of where we have been, where we are now, and how we are going to look like in the future.

So there are two lines, as you see on this slide, that we want to just keep in mind. That grid, is the funding. Again, are projections from our payment management system that we do. We need $63,800,000 to obtain 70 PCI. So that's just a metric that we have established for ourselves in the past.

But above that, right, that is our current PCI level, so 74,000,000 So just to get no worse, we project that we need $73,600,000 And for each of these fiscal years, so then again, you see the bar chart, right? So you as it's portrayed in this picture, so that's starting fiscal year twenty seventwenty eight, that's when the major T funds go away. So we are going to have a deficit in both of those scenarios, both keeping our PCI at current level and also getting to two seventy. So we anticipate that once that funding goes away, it's going affect our PCI. So moving on to the next slide.

So this is also another picture of before, present and future of our maintenance backlog. And then by definition, again, backlog, we define it as streets that we have not maintained in the past eight years for residential for major streets and then ten years for major streets. So we have a lot of lines, a little confusing, but just as the dash black line that you see on the left, that is way in the past now, right? So that's where we were going to be at if we didn't have Measure T and if we didn't have the VTA and the increased funding that we have. We were going to at that time, we were projecting to be well above $1,100,000,000 worth of deferred maintenance back backlog.

We have definitely bent that curve down as you can see on the other lines. And the latest one that we've ran is the orange as you can see. So the curve has been bent and it's gone down significantly. But as you see in the future years, we are still seeing some spiking of that curve, and that is because of the funding level that I just mentioned on the Measure T expiration. All right, so let's also take a look at how we have been doing historically as far as efficiency putting the projects out.

So getting funding is all good, but actually putting it on the ground, delivering is another story. So this is just to give you a picture of how we've been doing. So a busy graph, but the point of this one is as you can see we have been delivering for quite a long amount of time and since 2019 when we started that whole residential, it has definitely made a major impact. Funding, so 2028 again is going down, so we have to adjust our production as well. So you see that towards the end of the graph.

So how do we what's our plan for this year? What are we going to do? So we have programmed a total of 33 projects for this year. This is divided into two programs that we have for our program, residential and major streets. So total on the major streets is up on the upper part of table and residential.

So we also a couple of points about this slide. We use the minor contracts pretty effectively in our program. We define our concrete prep work into these minor smaller contracts, give also that time that we need to do all the work before in the pavement projects, bigger pavement projects. The total mileage is two thirty seven, just to give you an idea of how and this is all in 30 foot equivalent that you can just imagine that's paving a 30 foot wide lane from San Jose to Bakersfield. So that's how much work we have ahead of us this year and we have been roughly again hovering around that number for the past few years as well.

How do we select streets? So this local and neighborhood streets, so we have a total 135 pavement zones. So this is just going to how the criteria that we use. This is the most effective and efficient way for us to do actually deliver the work. These zones, they all get maintained in one shot, so all the neighborhoods in one area get done.

We look at a number of factors when we consider these. So, payment conditioning is definitely one. The geographic spread of the work is another. We also have an equity tool that we have implemented a few years and it's been in place and working great for us. Some before and after pictures, and this is from our most recent year, meaning twenty twenty four that are presented here.

The key point keep in mind is definitely our streets as we are getting towards that towards the end or not the end, but just towards doing more residential, we are definitely on better streets because we prioritize doing the ones that were in a very poor shape first. Which is a good thing and we are noticing that in our work as well. Local and neighborhood streets for 2025, so just a little bit more focused attention to the residential. So again, as Jennifer mentioned, residential streets are two thirds of our network. So fourteen fifty five miles is what we have on the residential.

So the work that we do on that makes a big impact on our overall network. And for this year, we have fifteen minuteor projects program plus six major contracts. And we're going to have four resurfacing. So these are just the major rehabilitation streets that need that type of work plus a ceiling work that will address those areas where we are still under preservation, the higher PCIs or whatnot. Sustainability is definitely something that we consider and innovation is another thing that we keep in mind when we actually put these projects together.

And we are always looking for better ways of doing things in the Paving program. So these are some highlights of the actual stuff that we've done that has been in place and we're seeing the benefit of that. So on the sustainability, on the low carbon GWP global warming potential side of things, we have a couple of years ago we edited, modified our concrete specification. Now we have been specking out a performance based concrete specification that is specking out the threshold for the GWP. It has been successful.

It really hasn't affected the workability of the material or the efficiency of the delivery and order performance. So we have we did a pilot, it has been successful. Now we have actually extended that to all of our concrete and we do use a lot of concrete material as part of these projects. Just to give you an idea, again, build over 2,000 ramps per year, so the numbers add up very quickly. On the permeable side of things, that is something that we have been we socialized and communicated that last year at this committee as well.

So we are on track to actually do the first pilot project with permeable interlocking concrete pavement in one of the streets that we have selected. We have finished design. That project is in the pipeline on the procurement side to go out. This will be a the goal here is to both not only provide a very good pavement, long lasting pavement surface, but also take care of the storm water runoff. And hopefully also some filtration that the system and its own going to have for the pollutants.

And this is not just one area, it's actually going to be the first fully permeable pavement structure that we're going to have in the city. So, that project is actually on Catherine Court in District 6, and that will be this construction season this coming summer. All right, so PROWAG is something that we have been looking at and keeping track of for the past few years. So this is just to give you an idea where that one stands. Stands for Public Right of Way Accessibility Guidelines.

So the latest updates on this has been adopted by General Services Administration and also federal DOT has adopted this as of last year, late last year. So both of these agencies have adopted it. It hasn't been fully adopted by DOJ yet. So that's we anticipate that in 2026. And we are keeping a close eye on that because it is going to have some impacts on our program.

As I mentioned, we build a lot of ramps. So the biggest impact on us is going to be on some of the detailed features of how we do things, but TBD until it actually gets adopted. So in summary and conclusion, we have successfully delivered payment projects using the funding, significantly improving our network, and we will continue to do so for the next two years when our funding is going to significantly get reduced. We're going to lose roughly 40% of our funding. Beyond that, we ask all of you to protect our investments in behalf and the city has done in the past few years.

We definitely need a more sustainable funding to keep that in a good condition. So it's kind of like car maintenance as well. If you let it defer, it's going to just get more and more expensive and it's not good. So I'll conclude the presentation and we'll be happy to answer any of your questions.

Thank you so much for the very thorough update of where we stand this year. Do we have any members of the public interested on this one?

We have three speaker cards. Diane, Jeff, and Jordan, please make your way down to the podium. You will have two minutes. If you are waiting to speak, please sit in the reserved seats in the front row.

Good afternoon. My name

is Diane Solomon, and I'm here on behalf of your BPAC. And first, thank you, transportation team and Jennifer, for seeking feedback from our from your BPAC. Given Measure T will expire in two and a half years, we have recommendations for priorities before our city's pavement improvement funding significantly decreases. Please make sure that our Measure T money is being used for the greatest impact, not just to maintain a status quo, use it for improvements that will achieve both street safety and our city's climate smart, climate action, and mode shift goals. Our to our annual bikeway review program, our city's annual bikeway review program, is restricted to adding bikeways.

We thank you for this, but we respectfully request that this program reach out to your BPAC and to other stakeholders to receive input about potholes and other pavement hazards, especially in the underserved areas of our city. Yes. One can report dangerous potholes on the 311 app, but we're unsure how such a reporting is received and acted upon by this department. We respectfully request that the paving schedule is not primarily based upon the pavement condition index. Please instead base this schedule upon the need for pedestrian and bicycle safety.

Street paving is a once in a generation opportunity to restripe our roads for maximum safety. Please ensure that our city's repaving standards employ the best practices, daylighting, narrowest allowed width, lane diets on major roads, crosswalk and cross bike markings. Again, please align this department's paving and repaving with our city's climate action, climate smart, and mode shift goals. Lastly, please thank you for considering permeable interlocking concrete pavement as a strategy, and consider it as a strategy for safer streets. Permeable interlocking concrete pavement can provide a visual and tactile signal to motorists to slow down in areas where we want drivers to slow down, like Japantown's Jackson Street.

There are cities that use this material to create what they call shared streets. Thank you, and thank you for making citizens a great place to live.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Good afternoon. My name is Jeff Boisier. I'm a resident of District 10. I wanna thank you for all the progress to date maintenance and improvements to our city streets. As an avid user of bikes for transportation, not just recreation, I greatly appreciate it.

I'd like to request that a standard be adopted as part of any repaving effort to always include flex post or fixed bollards between bike lanes and vehicle lanes where there is the risk of vehicles drifting into bike lanes. This is especially important on streets and roads that are curved. I know this is considered often, if not always in the case of high risk corridors, and I'm starting to see installations on existing roads in my own neighborhood. I know budgets are getting tighter, but I'd like to see a standard adopted and resources allocated that would make this a standard on all resurfacing and restriping efforts that include class two buffered bike lanes. I've witnessed firsthand in my own neighborhood the difference in driver behavior before and after flex post installations centered in the buffer between vehicles and bicycles.

Paint is not protection. Many in the cycling community will refer to flex post as vertical paint. I know it's not physical protection nor a permanent solution to safer bikeways, but it's a large step in the right direction to alter driver behavior, making it safe for bicyclists. Please make installation of FlexPost between bike and vehicle lanes standard for all restriping efforts on all streets that include bike lanes. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Jordan Muldau, District 3. Thanks for the repaving efforts, and thanks for all the new and improved bikeways that have been installed as part of this effort. I've written on a couple of the new ones, in particular West Taylor Street, and it's definitely much appreciated. To echo the previous two speakers, these pavements are really a once in a generation opportunity, and if we run out of Measure T funding, it might be more than one generation until some of these roads are repaved and restriped again. So making sure that we have the best in class architecture in our base designs would be very much appreciated.

And I know street standards have been evolving over the last few years, and there's definitely still the same emphasis on having the correct type of bikeway for the street. But one thing that around America that we've been neglecting is the intersection treatments. The intersections are places where people get hit and injured and killed the most, and so making sure that as you're entering the intersection that you have the maximum design safety for pedestrians and cyclists is crucial. We're about to run out of Measure T money, so it's important to have a plan for the future of how are we gonna be most effective with our money. And one thing is that the wider our roads are, the more asphalt there is, the more expensive that it is to repave it.

So one thing that I think is crucial is to make sure that we are not taking our existing roads and making them even wider. This will be relevant in the next agenda item. Just another shout out for slow streets. We should really create more pedestrianized areas. We don't necessarily need to close off streets. San Pedro is a great place, Definitely keep it close to cars, but there's other places where we can use the PICP treatment and create roads that are primarily for pedestrians, but the speeds are still slow enough that cars can go on them just very slowly. So thank you for consideration.

Back to the committee.

Thank you. Vice mayor Foley.

Great. Thank you. Thank you for the presentation. I always enjoy my sit down meeting with with the paving team to find out where in my district we'll be paving on on the local streets and where they're not being paved. And I did have one area that was supposed to be paved a couple years ago, but their PG and E work was happening and other things happened, so we were hoping to move it on, but the PG and E work hasn't happened yet.

So I appreciate your explanation so that we can then convey that message to the community as to why their streets aren't getting paved. I live in a neighborhood that has finally reached the the the condition of getting our streets repaved, and we've been going through all the corners or getting ADA curb cuts, and that's actually going real really well. Are are you using on the ADA ramps or anywhere else, what's the you you mentioned the low carbon mix. What percentage are you using the low carbon mix on our streets or 8A ramps or anywhere in general?

Very good question, thank you councilmember. We have been using that low carbon mix for all of our concrete work for the ramp. So we did the pilot, it was successful, we didn't really see any negative impacts on the performance of the material or the product that we were getting and that's been standard practice now.

Great, and is that a, does that save time, money, of course it's better for the environment, but what other benefits might it have?

So the prices are pretty equivalent to just the standard concrete, but the good thing is it is lower, it has a lower carbon footprint in terms of CO2 and GWP. And performance wise it is equally the same.

Great. Thank you. So, you mentioned it and, members of the public measured mentioned Measure T. Does Measure T sunset in 2027?

2028 is yes. '28. Right.

We have an election in 2026. Is there any consideration for bringing a measure before the public to, extend that measure t. I have to tell you, you know, when people say, oh, what do you do as a city council member? And, you know, we always talk about police and fire, public safety. But you know what the number three thing is? Streets. Our streets are getting the potholes being filled, and and we all talk about it. We all say that that's one of the things that we do. It's not the sexiest part of the work that we do, although I'm not sure any of it is actually sexy. But it's it matters to our community.

So I wonder if I don't wanna lose any time and measure t when the the fun sunset. What you've indicated is some of those streets that haven't been paved yet may be in jeopardy, and we've committed to our community that we're gonna pave all of our streets. So we need to do what we can to get something on the ballot. Are we polling? What are we doing with any possible extension of measure t?

So it's a very good question. And one of the reasons that we wanna keep bringing it up to council and committees is so it gets in front of mayor and council so that that sort of direction can be at least you would understand when we're gonna run out of the money and then what actions are gonna need to be taken in order to maintain that pavement condition, as well as many other infrastructure needs that the city has. Right now, I know there's a consideration for parks funding. We would certainly like to have that same consideration be brought to some of the other infrastructure needs. So that's the reason we're bringing it up.

The city manager is fully aware of this as well, and it's going through some of that pulling consideration of timing. It's not the only source of funding that we're considering. We're also trying to influence regional and county wide potential funding measures as well.

That's great. Thank you. And I wanna talk a little bit about, the safety of our streets for the bicyclists and pedestrians in particular in relation to Vision Zero. I truly believe that putting up even the temporary candlesticks, the bollards are effective. It narrows the street.

It visually narrows the street, and in most cases it causes drivers to slow down. Now I realize there's the occasional drivers who will go into the bike lane because it's just wide enough for their vehicle to get there and take that path because it bypasses traffic, but the majority of drivers are not doing that. The majority of drivers are slowing down. So I've done that in a number of the streets in in District 9, Hillsdale. I know my neighbors, some are really thrilled and some are really not, but to stay is what it's gonna stay.

Same thing with Pearl and Branham. We also know that actually paving speeds up traffic a little bit, speeds up because the road's now smooth, but that's also a good time to put the bike lanes on the appropriate streets that can can handle a bike lane like a Branham lane or and I know we all have these types of of streets in our neighborhood. So bottom line is that we need to make sure that those measure t funds are extended and I think our I don't know why I'm not doing polling, I'm sure the city manager and maybe the IGR team is polling on extending measure t, but it was certainly very popular and is a commitment to our community and we need to fulfill that commitment. Do you want me to make a motion or I'll move to accept the report.

Is there a second? Second. Is there a second? Okay. Had a motion and a second. Thank you. And in addition to obviously the bollards, do lane narrowing at the same time as we increase the bike lane and that helps with the speed. And I was just going to just make a follow-up comment before moving on to my colleagues about Measure T. Measure T was a bond and not a tax. So it's not really a question of extending like it often is with a tax, which is much easier to do, but it's a bond. And it's not that it sunsets in 2027, but that we will have spent the entire

capacity We on will

2020

expended the roadway paving portion of that. There's still some public safety the area. We're still doing some other work. But the pavement portion, push that up front to

get to And one of the reasons why I feel it's important that we continue to push for a more reasonable threshold for voter approval of bonds like that so that we can actually continue to provide services we have been. Okay. Let's move on to council member Campos.

Thank you, chair. So my question is, with the new legislation AB four one three that is, you know, enacted as of January 1, where does that daylighting law fit into the work that's being done to help visibility so that folks know where not to park?

Thank you, council member. It's a really good question, and it's a very timely one. If no one really knows what that is, it's referred to as the daylighting law, and what that means is we have to red curb or indicate that there's no parking on the approach to every intersection in the city, so that 20 feet from that crosswalk or crossing, we have to actually restrict parking. So we have tens of thousands of those locations in the city of city this size. So what we're trying to do is go after it systematically.

We will try to do some of that within our paving programs when we can, but we've got so many of these locations to actually deal with that we'll be having to go after it in the way that we can with so many locations. But we're having to comply with it. We won't get red curbing or signs out to all those locations anytime soon just because of the sheer numbers that we're to deal with. But we're fully aware of it. And I've already started to make some changes where we have parking meters, usually in the downtown or the commercial areas. We started to move those out of those areas already. But for the sheer numbers of those locations, it's gonna be tough to get to. We're gonna try to do it over these next couple of years though.

Thank you. I'm I'm glad to hear that it's, you know, being worked on and being thought about how we can address such a a massive and important new law for our city, for all the cities in in California. Staying on the theme of financing, I know that MTC has been exploring through their next generation freeway study an all lane tolling policy proposal, which aims to reduce greenhouse gases and includes potential trade offs when when cities do not have robust public transit infrastructure. This could mean more use more road usage on major roads and neighborhood streets. And so as we're talking about planning for the future and the need to to maintain the roads that we've been working so hard to preserve and improve, has the city been complementing this policy change in its forecasting?

You're referring to MTCs, Bay Area wide policy development on how to how to move towards a freeway that is actually fully tolled, all lanes. It's probably gonna be a while before that happens. Right now, there's, as you can see, there's quite a bit of development of the express lane system throughout the Bay Area. They're gonna probably try to get that fully built out first and then move to potentially going to more lanes being told. Given that, we're fully aware of it and have been tracking all that through the regional transportation plan.

That's probably not going to impact our need for funding for our local streets. But when MTC is considering their region wide Bay Area funding sources that they're considering right now, we're certainly at the table trying to advocate for local share of that money coming back for local roadway and local traffic safety and local bikes and ped work as well. So that's something that we've always been working with through VTA and directly with our representatives. Mayor Mahan is on the representative of MTC. So we have a direct way to get to that policy discussion.

Thank you. I'm glad to hear that our city is being proactive and thinking that through complete streets and robust public transit is the best way to really make sure that our city is moving forward in getting people you know, off of the freeways, out of their cars, and into healthier forms of active transportation. So thank you for your insight.

Thank you, council member. Council member Ortiz.

Thank you, chair. Again, wanna thank, the staff for presenting on something that's extremely important to our constituents, the paving of the streets. I'm sure my colleagues are always inundated with concerns about individuals having impacted roads, whether that's potholes or other just deteriorating conditions. But really wanna just elevate this work and, you know, thank you all for, you know, tirelessly advocating for the residents of our city. I did want to just piggyback off of Vice Mayor Foley's comments.

I am concerned about the funding wrapping up for this cycle. This is a program that our residents love. They they want more support from our city when it comes to paving of the roads. If, for example, if we do run out of money and have not or doesn't do not introduce a mechanism a funding mechanism system through the council, how would the city, I guess, manage the repaving of of roads as they deteriorate?

Well, if you recall the one slide that was actually talking about and it had the funding bars stacked up. So we've got three major sources right now. One of them is Measure T, and that will sunset in 2028. The other two, state gas tax through Senate Bill one, is in perpetuity, so that was a pretty big increase in gas taxes that must go directly to roadway paving, Essentially that was that was set up for. So that's gonna stay there.

And we also have VTA's sales tax measure that was approved by voters in 2016 that carves out a pretty good portion of that sales tax that is a formula then to each one of the cities. City of San Jose being the biggest city gets the largest share of that. That's good for thirty years and that's really a fairly new sales tax. So two of the three funding sources that really make up most of our paving are still going to stick around and they're going to be here for a long time. Measure T, which was about 40% is the one that's going to go away.

So we've got to look to see if we can try to find a way to restore something that would come with that and it could be a number of things that Councilmember Kampos talked about with maybe MTC, maybe another renewal of a VTA sales tax measure or something that the city do. We're gonna look at continue to look at all of those sources.

That's great. Glad to hear that the city is committed to making sure that these funds don't run out or replenishing them through another avenue. Some of the questions from the public prompted me to ask something not necessarily, I guess connected to street paving but not necessarily like fully connected. I know that as we talk about safe streets, safe traffic, know, all the infrastructure we're doing regarding bike lanes which I support, including infrastructure for the middle divider and other ways to reduce traffic. Are we looking at other cities and what mechanisms they're utilizing?

I know in San Francisco they have this program Slow Streets, which is specific to like different neighborhoods to create like an area where it's safe to walk, live and play. Is there a reason why the city of San Jose hasn't adopted similar avenues?

So, yeah. Another really good question. That slow streets movement really started during the pandemic when there was actually less driving and many cities, not all, but many cities looked to actually restrict cars on certain streets. There are residential streets, obviously, we really couldn't do that on arterials and that sort of thing. We looked into it back then.

We actually went out into the public to try to ask some questions. Was this something that you wanted, like in these areas? And we didn't see a lot of interest in that because we already had fewer cars on the road. We didn't see a lot of interest that was needed because people we have pretty good walking sidewalks and infrastructure like that. So that was what most people wanted was safe walking because they were getting out of during the pandemic.

There is still some of the slow streets around in some of the cities, but many of the cities have now removed those and It opened them back is something we always look at to see if there's good ideas in other parts of the country. We're of course in many different organizations of transportation planning in large cities and stuff. So we pick up on a lot of potential new things for us to try. And we're pretty good at it and we're pretty out there on terms of some of the innovative things that we're doing for street and bicycle pedestrian safety. I think we're probably leading in some areas with the way we've been able to implement some of our Vision Zero programs and practices that we've been putting into the city.

It is costly to remake a lot of these streets, but you're gonna see some coming up in the near future. We're gonna be remaking some of the downtown streets that we're using just paint and plastic. We're gonna make them more permanent. And you're gonna see some other streets that are in your district. We did just do McKee. Yep. You're gonna see some other ones happening in Districts 5 And 7 And 3 as we remake some of the roads over there in that area to Keyes and Graham. So, we're doing some pretty significant changes, but they are expensive.

I appreciate that. I know you guys are doing a good job. I support this being my district, I think, is number three in fatalities here across the city. So definitely want to make sure that we're still identifying funds. I that you you just two questions. So you you said that cities have started stepping away from the slow streets program. Is there reasoning for that?

Well, they just some of it just didn't seem that it was I don't know all the cities it did. I know San Francisco stuck with a couple of them, but then removed some. Oakland removed some, stuck with a couple of them in other cities. So some that were down here in the South Bay or East Bay, some of those cities did remove. They tried it, just didn't it wasn't really doing much except restricting some of the movement in those streets. Some have chosen to keep it on there, but most have I think removed them. Thank you. Appreciate that.

And then you mentioned Vision Zero, very expensive. I support it. I want to make sure we're restructuring the streets that need to be restructured. My understanding is some of those funds may be getting cut pretty soon as well. Is there talks about what we will do to make sure that those projects continue to be fully funded and the coordination of that has funds?

Councilmember, another really timely question. You're probably asking a question that all of us in all aspects of local government is wondering what is going to happen with federal funding in this We new don't have the full answer to that, so I don't know what's gonna happen with future grants. We have been very successful in achieving grant awards up until this time. What we're trying to do is make sure that those that are still in a process at the federal level, that we're still gonna be able to secure those. Because we have some significant amounts of money that are in the process of being, you know, finalizing contracts and that sort of thing.

So those are the ones we're worried about. I don't have an answer whether or not that's gonna the future of transportation grants is gonna change. I suspect it will quite a bit. We just don't know that yet. But we're just trying to hold on to what those grants are. We already have been awarded.

Since you mentioned it about programs that rely on grants, the King Road, Complete Streets, do we have funds for that? Are we concerned about that funding?

We have partial funding. Because on part part of the the King Road that you're familiar with, that was coming from statewide funds, so they wouldn't be necessarily the same sorts of concerns that the federal transportation grants have. Do have we have many plans, actually, would have been to follow through with more grants at the federal level under Biden administration transportation authorization. The federal transportation bill will have to be reauthorized in the next year or two, so that's gonna be very interesting to see where that goes. We will be working with IGR folks and all the rest of the people that are interested in this to try to make sure that we can still maintain federal transportation funding coming in for many important things that we do.

Alright. Thank you so much.

Scary times for transportation funding in my opinion. I think we should assume we're not going to get anything until Congress decides they're an equal branch of government, decided, which for some reason they don't don't believe they are anymore. Okay. I I have a few questions for you. Can can can you put up slide six back on the screen?

I just wanna I think this is sort of the key slide that talks about the gaps in funding going forward. We have the funding that we have from Measure T that puts us over 100% of our ongoing maintenance needs, but we're going to be, what, 70% or 80%. Fortunately, we do have local sources that are not susceptible to federal clawback or anything that are going to give us about 80% of what we need to keep this going forward. But clearly, we have a negative. Maybe this is too long of a conversation for now. Maybe you should come back the next time you come forward. But what are the priorities are you thinking about is how you'll prioritize the use of that funding when we no longer have the excess money but we're going to be having to do what we can in

the most important areas? So this is what I was referring to at the previous question, and the far bar to the left you can see the three main funding sources, and then that grayed out one is the Measure T and it goes away in a couple years. So what we're gonna be, we do still have those two main sources of state gas tax and the VTA Measure B. Now how do we prioritize making sure we still get all the work done that

we want Well, do we prioritize the work? We're not going to get it all done in there.

We're still intending remember we made that we wanted to be able to pave every road in the city when we started this about six years ago, and we still want to be able to do that. We think we still we may to stretch it a little bit beyond that nine years.

Do we think that will be before the Measure T runs out, we will look at

it in the We're going

still get three big paving years in this 2025, 2026 and 2027. So we're still going to be working pretty heavily out there getting almost everything done. We right now, just the way we're forecasting with the cost increases that we're seeing coming in on bids, we may have to stretch a little bit to pick up the last pretty minor miles of work. So we're thinking we're gonna get pretty darn close to that goal of trying to get every street paved. And then, as you know, and Frank mentioned it, is the minute we put that pavement down it starts to degrade and our PCI will start to recede.

So that's why the conversation was a very good one here to actually figure out how we can still maintain that at least 70 or even a higher 74 level which is a pretty darn good pavement compared to where we were even five or six years ago.

I suppose is the simple answer to my question that going forward, starting in twenty seventwenty eight when that third bar goes away, it'll all be based on the areas with the lowest PCI and they'll get the work first?

How Well, we're probably going to recommend like we did before is making sure that the major street system is going to be the priority because we have to keep those really in very good shape because that's where probably eighty five percent of all the traffic and trips occur. But we still have enough to actually still maintain the local street system, probably not to the same level that we have been for the last five or six years, but we will then work with each council office to prioritize which ones we're going be able to get to. But you can see it right now it's not looking like we'll be able to keep up with it if we don't find some other funding to get us above that bottom red line.

If I could just build on that too, John. Rick Scott, Assistant Director of DOT. If we could get to Slide eight, I think that's pretty instructive right there. You see from two fourteen to 99, that's still a pretty robust paving program and that's basically when we lose Measure T. But you're right, we will have to kind of pivot and cover kind of more condition based. I think we're all committed to getting the entire local street network completed. That's still true. It will just be less. That's going to be the story going forward.

So you think about 100 miles a year going

Yeah, yeah. Frank and I started with the program, that was 2013. The program has been there before and it's still, in comparison, a very strong program, but it will not reach the levels we've been reaching the last few years. We've very fortunate to have all the funding sources. So it's still essential and again to keep us in good, we don't want to go back down. I think we definitely need those sources of funding to make sure that we keep ourselves in the 70s and above.

Back to Slide six. The twenty four-twenty five has all the bars are much bigger. What happened in that year and why were the numbers so much greater in that year than in the years going forward?

You want to take it Frank?

Yes. So in that particular year, we had a lot of liquidation and leftover money that we were able to actually put forward and do more work with. And then going back, I was going to add to your question, what is our plan moving forward after Measure T sunsets, how are we going to manage it? So by as John said, 92% of all of we are projecting at this point, 92% of all the residential streets will be repaved or maintained, right, by 2029. And then the rest that we are not going to have that Measure T funding, So, we're still going to be in a good condition, but from payment management perspective, the best way to handle it would be just to keep the good roads in a good condition and knowing that we are going to have that budget gap, we have to look at all kinds of prioritization.

So major streets carry most of our traffic, so that needs to probably be weighed out. And it will be tough though because the deterioration of our network is going to be higher than the investment that we're putting in. So over it's not going to happen overnight, but within a few years, if we don't address the funding gap, we are going to see network degrade over time. And that's why the streets are divided between major streets and local streets is before Measure T, that's how they

were prioritized. The major streets received all the maintenance and for twenty years the local streets received nothing. So the whole strategy with Measure T was to get through all of the local streets to give ourselves some time basically so that we could again manage when that funding went away. So that's generally where we are. But again, think we have seen how far this program has come and we don't want to see it go back. Pretty incredible what this team has been able to accomplish over the last five years.

Yeah. It's been great to watch. Thank you. One last question. The PICP, what makes a good candidate for PICP? How does a street get selected for that?

Yeah, a lot of variables are considered for that. So definitely the slope, the cross slope, the existing infrastructure that's there for storm water because in some areas of the city more than the others, we don't currently have infrastructure for collecting the water runoff, excess stormwater runoff. So we look at that and then also the ease of construction. Again, is a pilot and that's how we do the innovations or creative ways of doing things. We don't want to just roll it out in a big scale. We do a small project.

So it's not about the use of the road as much as it is about other infrastructure questions?

Well the use to, right? So on the major streets it's going to be a lot more complicated than residential. Catherine Court is a residential street, and there is no existing infrastructure for Stonewater either.

So basically, if there were the so I presume it's more expensive, so by some significant amount, right? So obviously we can't do it everywhere. But if funding weren't an issue, any sort of minor street would be a candidate for this. There's not something about certain streets that make it a better candidate than others.

I could add to it. So typically low volume streets with lower traffic loads and also lower speeds, that's why the local streets will be

a

preferred location for us. Also streets that are straight, not, you know, with curves and things like that. Okay. And with, you know, 2% or less of a grade.

Great. I look forward to getting a close view of the street when it's done. I think it would be great to understand it better once we once we see it in place. Alright. We had a motion and a second, so let's, move to our vote.

Alright. Motion carries four zero. Thank you so much for the report. And we're on to our last item which is our transportation activities annual report. So, John, just move

Thank right again, chair Cohen, John Russo, Director of Transportation. We've got a new team moving in. Let me introduce the presenters. Jessica Zink, Deputy Director Peter Reiser, Associate Transportation Specialist and Neil Ong, our Senior Engineer. Also joining us up here will be Ramzas Madhu, Division Manager, Florian LaPoustier, Division Manager in the back row. So I think Jessica is going to kick it off.

Absolutely. Good afternoon, Jessica Zank, Deputy Director for Planning and Project Delivery. And welcome to everybody for the first meeting of 2025. This report is one that we do every year for the newer members. It's intended to give all of you as well as all of the public information about the major projects that we do with partners across the county, across the region, across the state.

So that's often with Caltrans, Authority, with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Caltrain, High Speed Rail, other partners throughout the area. So you have a status report in packet on every major projects that we're working on. And then we typically pick out one or two items to go into in more depth in the presentation. So to do that today, we're gonna have Pete Rice talk about our area plan for North San Jose and Neil talk about how he's coordinating with Pete on the regional highway and expressway projects that are really critical to making North San Jose function much better than it does today. So with that, I will turn it over to Pete.

All right. Thank you, Jess. Good afternoon, members of the committee. I'm Pete Rice, Transportation Planner with DOT. I appreciate this opportunity to present on Connect North San Jose.

It's our North San Jose Multimodal Transportation Improvement Plan or MTIP for short. For the new members, MTIPs are our transportation plans for high growth areas of the city. It's where we work with the community to identify, needed transportation improvements. This plan aligns our transportation investments with, broader policies like Climate Smart, the general plan and also regional sustainability goals. This effort focuses on equity, future growth and reducing auto dependency while addressing existing challenges.

So I'd like to start here with an overview of the plan area. So you can see here on the right, it's about eight square miles bordered by on the north, we have Highway 237, and it stretches down to about Heading Street there on the on the southern tip. In the east and west, we have Coyote Creek and Guadalupe River. And then on the southern half, we went about a half mile beyond the two freeways, 101 And 880. And if you know the history of this area, it was home to a lot of farms, which is, still evident today by the oversized blocks that we we see out there.

And this design has supported industrial and employment uses, but it also creates some challenges for multimodal connectivity and access. There we go. So to address these challenges, we've established these three core goals to guide this plan. The first is lead with equity. This means we're engaging with and directing investment to underserved communities.

The second is plan for the future. So like I said, this is an area where we expect a lot of growth. The projects we identify will support this growth while also addressing current issues. And then the third is promote mode shift. So we aim to reduce reliance on single occupancy vehicles by improving options for walking, biking, transit and carpooling, at and the same time enhancing safety and mobility and air quality.

So with those goals in mind, this is the planning process. So we kicked off last January, about thirteen months ago, and we are on schedule to have the plan ready for review in the next month or two. Currently, we're finalizing our project designs and our cost estimates. And at the end of this month, we'll be bringing our ideas to the community for feedback. This is what we've heard.

Okay. There we go. So we've heard from the community so far. Engagement has really been central to this effort with more than 11 events and over 360 participants so far. The top transportation priorities include increasing transit frequency and improving connections, adding protected bike lanes and ensuring better maintenance as well as improving sidewalks to enhance pedestrian safety and connectivity.

Much of what we've heard goes beyond the transportation realm. Residents, up there are really asking for more public spaces, more places to gather that are not work or home. We call these third spaces, so things like parks, grocery stores, and entertainment venues. And that's something we we really heard a lot of, so I just wanna emphasize that a little bit. And now let's go on to our projects and next steps.

So like I said, we're at at the phase where we're sort of fleshing out our project ideas and about to take them to the community. So I've broken them down here into three categories. The first are key key corridor improvements. So here, we're upgrading the pedestrian, bicycle, and transit infrastructure on the key corridors in North San Jose. These are your sort of typical MTIP improvements.

The second category is reimagining the street grid. I touched on this earlier, but this is sort of expanding on what was in the previous development policy. We're envisioning a more connected street grid similar in size well, a block size that's similar to downtown. So that will improve connections between job centers and housing and transit, allow people to walk and bike more, noting that we do wanna continue to support the industry and other employment uses up there. And then the final category is transforming North 1st Street.

This is obviously a very key corridor for North San Jose. And so we're looking to not only improve transit efficiency and bike and pedestrian infrastructure, we're also looking to strengthen the last mile connections to the transit along North 1st Street, so that's more accessible for the people that work and live there. And then as far as next steps, like I said, we are in the process of refining our project ideas, and we'll be taking them to a community workshop at the end of the month. This is at a place called Expansive North First. It's a coworking space right in the middle of the plan area.

And then after that, we'll be developing the draft plan for review. So that's it. And if if you want the shirt that council member Cohen was wearing in the previous slide, come to our outreach event at the end of the month. You can get one there. You have to participate, but it'll be a good time. Now I'll pass it over to Neil to talk about regional projects in the area.

All right. Thank you, Peter. Again, Neil Ong, Senior Engineer with the city's transportation regional project delivery team. So Peter provided an overview of the planned transportation network being developed within North San Jose. However, as shown on the map, North San Jose is bordered by major freeways such as 101, 880, and 237, which can be access barriers.

Therefore, it is crucial to implement multimodal roadway improvements along these freeways to enhance access to and from North San Jose and support the Connect North San Jose initiative. To accomplish this, my team is currently working with our regional partners at Caltrans and VTA on five major roadway improvement projects in North San Jose. Today I'll focus on three critical issues in various stages: 101, 101, and 880 Montague Interchange and McCarthy O'Toole Intersection. Before detailing the three projects, I just want to highlight the key goals that guide our team in project implementation. First is modernizing infrastructure to meet current and future transportation needs.

Next, improving connectivity to enhance community access. Third, connecting bike and trail networks by addressing gaps near freeways. And then lastly, incorporating complete street principles to create safer, more accessible roadways including separate bike ped facilities when feasible. So the first project is the 101 Trimble project, which is nearing completion of construction. Some key features of the project include reconfiguring the interchange to enhance traffic operations and efficiency, constructing a separated class one bike ped path connecting bicyclists and pedestrians to the Guadalupe River Trail with full separation from vehicles.

We are widening the bridge to provide structural support for the bike ped facility and additional vehicular traffic lane. And then lastly, implementing protected intersections at Seaboard and Dela Cruz as well as Central Dela Cruz to enhance safety for bikes and peds. So most of the major improvements have been completed as seen with some of the progress photos. On the left you see the completed widened bridge. In the middle, a well lit under crossing with 101 southbound on ramp and off ramps going over, improving visibility for bicyclists and pedestrians, and avoiding conflicts with vehicles.

On the right, a staircase which provides a convenient shortcut connection across the class one path loop. With the major construction being completed, we celebrated a ribbon cutting ceremony on August 30 with our partners including members from the CTC, BTA, City of Santa Clara, County of Santa Clara and Caltrans. Although major construction aspects of the project have been completed, there are still some remaining work to be done which includes activating the signal at the city's Trimble And Seaboard intersection, completing the class one bike path with activating the pedestrian lights and striping, as well as landscaping and final punch list items from our inspector. The project is working towards completion by the spring timeframe, pending weather, followed by plant establishment periods for both city and Caltrans right away. So the next project I want to discuss is the 101 Zanker project, which is in the final stages of the environmental phases.

The proposed improvements include a new over crossing above 101 connecting Zanker Road and Old Bayshore Road on the North to 4th Street, Skyport Drive on the South. The over crossing will feature class four protected bikeped facilities for safe separated travel from vehicles. We're also replacing non standard ramps at Old Bay Shore, Brokaw Road and 1st Street, and consolidating those ramps at Bearing Drive, reducing conflict points. And then lastly, improving the southbound US 101 on ramp at Technology Drive and Ford Street. We've been making a lot of progress on this project.

Preliminary engineering was completed in 2020. We're currently in the environmental phase. The draft environmental document was circulated for public comment from December 2023 to February 2024, and a public meeting was held on 01/10/2024. Next steps were expected to conclude the environmental phase to in this spring with the project addressing the public comments and certifying the final environmental document. We expect the design phase to begin later this year.

Alright. Last project is the 880 Montague And McCarthy O'Toole intersection projects which were established through an agreement between the city and county for delivery. Proposed improvements include reconfiguring the 880 Montague Interchange, as well as constructing a grade separation at McCarthy Boulevard and O'Toole Avenue Intersection to elevate the roadway over Montague Expressway to improve traffic flow on Montague. Progress we've made is we're currently in the project initiation phase focusing on developing a project scope and assessing feasibility through a project study report to get conceptual approval from Caltrans. The project initiation phase is expected to conclude by mid-twenty twenty five.

Next steps, moving we're into the environmental phase where project will continue to develop, analyze and refine conceptual designs and ensure compliance with the environmental process. So that concludes our presentation and we're happy to take any feedback, comments or questions.

Thank you for the update. I apologize to my colleagues for the focus on North San Jose, but I appreciate it very much. Let's move on. Actually, there's there's some District 3 in there, though. A lot of District 3. Let's, move to public comment if we have any.

We have two speaker cards, Diane and Jordan. Please make your way down to the podium. You will have two minutes.

Good afternoon. Your Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee hereby submits the following comments on this report. We support the adoption of the Stevens Creek Vision Zero implementation plan, and we encourage the city to use the transit first policy in the 2025 better bike plan to implement the plan to its maximum extent, including fully protected bikeways and fully protected intersections, safe for pedestrian facilities including refuge islands and bus only lanes to increase the speed and reliability of VTA buses and make transit compatible with driving. Also, we support the North San Jose grid reset, which was presented to us in December. Creating a grid network gives bicyclists and pedestrians more travel options, especially in the presence of detours.

Grids also reduce the pressure on Ontario's, allowing for slower speeds, lower volumes, and narrower roads. We also support the best in class pedestrian and bicycle access to the new BART stations and the upgraded Diridon Station. Our BPAC would like to be involved in reviewing and providing feedback on the bicycle and pedestrian circulation plans, and hope you'll direct them to do extent that the designs are still being iterated on inside. As Jordan said earlier in our meeting, we're opposed to projects that increase roadway capacity that leads to increased vehicle miles traveled and increased emissions. These kinds of projects presently include the widening of Highway 101 and Montague Expressway, plus it will create two new interchanges that are larger than the interchanges that they're replacing, exclamation point.

The increased width of Montague Expressway will also decrease comfort and safety for active transportation users moving along and across Montague Expressway. While Barrias area certainly has challenging access issues for bicyclists and pedestrians, creating new highway interchange for cars is not gonna make vulnerable users feel safer. It's just gonna create worse barriers, and that's our comments on that. And we thank you for making San Jose a great place to live and for consider

Thank you. Next speaker.

Jordan Moldow, District 3. I wanna thank the teams who worked on the bike path along Trimble and the team working on the Connect North San Jose project. Those are both fantastic projects. I wanted to highlight something in one of your slides. Full separation of cars from people when feasible.

I think that we really need to drop the when feasible part in all these projects. As a society, we've spent eighty years doing whatever we could possibly do to make it feasible to go from point A to point B in a car safely, and have a place to park where you get there. It's about time where we put that same level of effort towards making it possible to bike and walk anywhere you want, and arrive at your destination without injuries. From my perspective, if it's not feasible to build a new interchange and have full separation from cars, it's not feasible to build the interchange. And to the team's credit, the design for Zanker does have full separation from on the interchange itself.

But there's three roads being widened as part of that project, Bering, Brokaw, And North 4th Street, which will have between five and eight lanes with speeds of 35 to 40 miles an hour that call for nothing more than class two unprotected bike lanes. We need to do better. If we're widening a street, we should be doing it for the sake of the bicycles and the pedestrians, not for the cars. And again, the wider that we make our streets, the more you have to repave, the more backlog that we're gonna have, the bigger bonds that we're gonna need to ask our voters to approve. So, really, I think we need to drop the when feasible and make sure that we're always safe on the road no matter what mode you choose.

Thank you.

Back to the committee.

Thank you. Councilmember Campos.

Thank you so much for the information. I am a huge fan and advocate of public transit, so this item makes me particularly excited. And I'm looking forward to the South San Jose spotlight because we have many transit needs and communities who would greatly benefit from the economic mobility opportunities that are afforded to those who have access to regional public transit. So you mentioned in your presentation third spaces and how important they are. As a city, how do we incentivize land use for third spaces when they're oftentimes low or no profit margins associated with those spaces?

Yeah, absolutely. Jessica, I can take this one. We work very closely in the Department of Transportation with our colleagues, specifically on things like this with economic development and planning building code enforcement to kinda take this feedback that we're hearing and share it with others. Now when we shared this with with those colleagues, this is not new to them. They know from their own outreach in North San Jose that there's a lack of this amenities whether it's talking about a place to get lunch or dinner or a real community center or, you know, etcetera, like as Pete presented.

So I think one of some of the things that we've tried to do as a city are to encourage ground floor retail that has pros and cons, to encourage also mixed use development in a single spot. So often that looks like some buildings that are commercially oriented and others that are residential within a given area, but it really, does depend on the context. And I think the the council has also and will continue to have conversations about the balance of those priorities given the housing crisis and the desire for for more development in general. So it is a balancing point, and the city really looks to its land use power to address it primarily.

Thank you. I think those conversations with, you know, council offices in in the districts where this development is happening, and the neighbors who are going to be impacted by that development is critical so that we are making the the best out of, you know, the scarce land that we have. I know in my district there's a couple of developments that have gone up where the the Ground Floor space has been vacant for a year plus. And so, it's important as we are looking at the planning phase, how we can engage the community to make sure that we're finding the right fit for the opportunity that we have with development there. Thank you.

Yeah. Thank you for highlighting that. Obviously, it's a big concern of mine in North San Jose, and and we hear that from residents there the most. I think it's the most underserved part of the city when it comes to actual amenities within distance. The it is the largest area in the city without a community center, without a library. The parks per resident are lower. The number of shops and restaurants are lower. So we're hoping as we build out our housing plans in North San Jose that that will that will help. I just I'm just gonna mention a few things in North San Jose since we were talking about it that I I wanna keep front of mind. Obviously, that street grid issue is important.

It was really exciting to hear the students at San Jose State take on North San Jose as their development project last year in the planning department, and they identified this distance between intersections as a real problem in North San Jose. We want it to be a dense part of town, but the distance to get from street to street is really far, and so it makes it not walkable. So that's been identified, and I'm glad to see that that's part of the conversation that you're having. Something that's not mentioned on your study, and I know it's probably outside the scope of our funding at this point, although I'm pushing VTA to keep it on our on our radar is great separation for light rail along 1st Street At Montague at Trimble. The dis the time it takes to get from the residential North San Jose to downtown and vice versa makes makes using light rail less attractive and keeps more people in their cars.

And so we definitely need to keep that grade separation on the list. And then I'm just gonna mention the Montague 101 I mean the Montague 880 O'Toole project. By the way, years of all that fight with the Santa Clara County about Montague Trimble, I I still don't see any problem at Montague Trimble. The problem is at Montague 101 I mean Montague 880. So I'm glad we're addressing the real problem and not the county's imagined problem.

But I I just wanna mention or ask the question. When you go East Of 880, to me the worst bottleneck in all of North San Jose and one of the worst in the entire city is Montague at Oakland Road and Main Street. Not Montague at 880 or Montague at O'Toole, but Montague at Oakland Road. If you get off anytime after 01:00 in the afternoon on any weekday, if you try to go north and get off at at Montague and go east, you will sit twenty minutes to go the the eighth of a mile distance from 880 to Oakland Road. There's probably stoplight timing and other things we can do in the short term while we while we work on this.

But as we work on this plan at Montague 880, we should be looking all the way east to Oakland Road as part of that entire region. Because if we don't solve that, the traffic will be backed up on 880 like it is in the afternoon all the way almost to Trimble, and it's all caused by the stoplight at Montague and Oakland Road, not by the other intersections. I don't know if you have any comments at this point or somebody should check that out, but I'm it's a very frustrating

Yeah. Thank you. Neil can speak to this more depending on how many conversations they've had about it. But it is, know, all of these projects are on this list because of shared jurisdiction. So that is a shared intersection between Milpitas, San Jose and of course the county operating Montague itself. So we can look into that more, but appreciate it.

Yeah. It's a tough one. I was thinking about it the other day when I was sitting there trying to get to a meeting. Milpitas probably loves it because all their folks on Main Street seem to flow nicely south, but people coming east into San Jose on Montague have to wait for that. So just maybe something we be looked into.

Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. Do we have a motion to accept the report? Move for approval. Second. Alright. We have a motion to second. Let's vote. Alright. The motion carries four zero. We're on to open forum. Do we have anybody for open forum?

We have no public comment.

Alright. Great. We are adjourned at 03:26PM.