I'm not sure if you're a good person.

After each agenda item is presented, the mayor, we're asked for committee member comments and then take public comment.

If you'd like to speak during public comment, please complete your speaker card and submit it to the clerk before the item is heard.

Members of the public will have two minutes to share their comments.

At this point in time, we will take public comment on items that are not on our agenda.

Madam Clerk, have we received any cards?

No cards.

So we'll close public comment on non-agenda items and move to our discussion items for today.

We begin with item 3A, Lee Speak Greenway.

We've got my senior engineer, Nicole Castellino here to introduce the item.

Good afternoon, Mayor, Committee members, city managers, staff, and members of the public.

My name's Nicole Castellino, senior engineer in the transportation section of public works.

I'm here to introduce Matthew Bomberg of Alameda County Transportation Commission, also known as Alameda CTC, to present on the East Bay Greenway Multimodal Project.

Okay.

Good afternoon, committee members.

Thank you very much for having us.

My name is Matt Bomberg, Principal Transportation Engineer with the Alameda County Transportation Commission.

I'm joined by a couple of colleagues today.

We're very excited to be here presenting on the East Bay Greenway project.

This is a proposed regional trail facility that's many years in the making, was originally proposed almost 20 years ago and has been depicted in various long-range planning documents since that time.

And the last four years have seen intensive work on conceptual design, environmental clearance, final design, and securing significant external funding for the project.

And the portions in San Leandro are now close to concluding design and beginning construction.

The construction pays the project, so it's an ideal time for an informational update to this body.

I want to thank city staff, particularly Nicole, also Robin Chi, Jason and I, and Sheila Marquises for all the staff partnership as we've been working on the development of the project.

Want to note that this is a project that's consistent with and implements a number of the city's adopted plans and policy priorities, including the city's Vision Zero traffic safety policy, the bike and pedestrian master plan, climate action plan, and the numerous general general plan goals and policies around sustainable transportation options in transit oriented development areas.

Also, want to note that the San Leander Council did adopt a resolution expressing support for the project and approving the concept design of the project back in 2022 that's kind of provided a framework for our development of the project since that time.

So the East Bay Greenway is a proposed 16-mile regional active transportation project that will link communities and improve access for people walking, biking, and taking BART.

The project will generally connect along the BART corridor between Lake Merritt and South Hayward BART stations through cities of Oakland, San Leandro, Unincorporated County, and Hayward.

It'll improve safety and multimodal access along streets that are identified as part of the Alameda County High Injury Network and through equity priority communities and priority development areas.

Is in the final design phase, the southern segments in the county in Hayward are also active projects, but are proceeding on slightly different timelines.

And then this is a zoom in on the north segment, which again includes the portions in Oakland and San Leandro.

The north segment is about 10 and a half miles, extending from the Lake Merritt Bart station to the Bayfair station area.

And as we have proceeded with the design of the project, we have actually broken this into four different construction packages for purposes of design and implementation, two of which are in San Leandro.

I'll zoom in on the city now.

So this map shows the project alignment within City of San Leandro.

So there's the two different construction packages in San Leandro.

The San Leandro package runs along San Leander Boulevard from the Oakland City limit to East 14th Street through the San Leander BART station Area and other other neighborhoods.

Alameda CTC will be the construction implementing agency for the San Leander Boulevard construction package.

And then there's also the Caltrans or East 14th construction package, which runs along East 14th Street or State Route 185 from San Leander Boulevard down to the Bay Fair TOD area.

Alameda's CTC is the project sponsor for this construction package, but we will be partnering with Caltrans, who will be the construction implementing agency.

So touch on some of the different features that are part of the project.

These images show some of the different features.

The project includes shared use paths, which are separated from street and can be used by bicycles and pedestrians.

These are predominantly within the Oakland part of the project.

Protected bike lanes, which are bikeways separated from vehicles by raised islands or parked vehicles, in order to provide an experience that is comfortable to users of a variety of different ages and abilities.

This is the primary type of bike facility that's proposed within San Leandro.

It will include a mix of one and two-way protected bikeways.

The project includes flashing beacons and pedestrian signals to improve yielding and stopping compliance at crosswalks where there's no traffic signals.

Notably, the project will add a number of new crossing opportunities with these types of enhancements along East 14th Street based on feedback from the community that the crossing opportunities are too few and far between, and people have to walk up to a quarter mile out of direction to find a marked crosswalk.

Protected intersections are another project element, which are a bikeway design that's separated from vehicles by islands within the intersection to shorten crossing distances and reduce conflicts between bikes and turning vehicles, as well as bus stop improvements, including several new bus stops along San Leander Boulevard that will serve a planned AC transit route extension to service the area around the Boys and Girls Club.

Some additional project elements include bioswales and bioretention areas to comply with state and regional stormwater treatment requirements.

And I want to note that the project's actually going to install a surplus of bioretention areas, which will help the city in meeting its regional clean water program goals.

Placemaking features, including bike wayfinding signage, bike racks, benches, and a new plaza area at the intersection of San Leandro Boulevard, Park Street, and Best Street.

New street lighting and some sections along San Leander Boulevard where there's currently gaps in the streetlight coverage, as well as new trees and landscaping.

So I'll now show a few graphics to provide an overview of the project design for some of the different sections within San Leandro moving from north to south.

So this slide shows the section of San Leandro Boulevard starting at the northern city limit down to Creekside Plaza, just north of Davis Street.

So along this stretch of the roadway, the city's already implemented a lane reduction that's aimed at addressing kind of longstanding speeding issues.

And the East Bay Greenway project will add a protected two-way bike facility on the west side of the street.

It'll be separated from the vehicular traffic lanes by a landscape buffer area.

And then the project will also close street lighting gaps along the west side of the street to better illuminate both the bikeway and the overall roadway.

The lane widths will also be tightened up to create a feeling of enclosure for drivers and promote safer speeds.

The next sort of section of the project within San Leandro is the BART station area, going from Creekside Plaza down to Thornton Avenue.

So in this area, the city implemented a significant streetscape project about 15 years ago that included widened sidewalks, pedestrian scale lighting, landscaping, a number of other elements.

And the East Bay Greenway project will essentially layer on top of that.

It will sort of flip the parking in the bike lanes to create parking protected bike lanes so that cyclists are separated from traffic to create a more comfortable cycling experience, as well as adding another, a number of treatments to improve bike connections to side streets and some pedestrian accessibility improvements.

Moving further south, south of the BART station area between Thornton Avenue and East 14th Street.

This section of San Leandro Boulevard has existing buffered bike lanes, and the project will convert these to protected bike lanes by adding new landscape buffer islands between the bikeway and the traffic lanes.

Where possible, where there's no underground utility conflicts, these would include new street trees to further create that sense of a boulevard feel.

And then this section of the project will include those new bus stops that I added and also close some sidewalk gaps on the west side of the street under the bar tracks.

And then finally, looking at the East 14th section of the project, which again goes from the intersection of San Lander Boulevard down to Bayfair Drive.

And this segment is again State Route 185, so this is a Caltrance facility.

So currently the street has two travel lanes on each side, a raised median or center turn lane, and two very wide parking lanes.

And the East Big Greenway project will reconfigure the street, shifting the median over, adding protected bike lanes on both sides of the street, tightening up the vehicular lane widths, and then retaining parking on the east side of the street.

In this segment, the project's also gonna add new street lighting on the east side of the street between 150th Avenue and Bayfair Drive, three new kind of enhanced pedestrian crossing opportunities, as well as some protected intersections at key connection points into the Bayfair TOD area and San Lander High School.

Just to give you a couple more images of some of the project features, these are just to show some of the bus stop designs that are included as part of the project.

These are consistent with national best practice complete streets and transit design guidance implemented elsewhere in Alameda County.

So this is an example of a floating bus stop where bike and bus merging is sort of eliminated and for a safer overall experience for both transit operators and cyclists.

And then in some more constrained cases, some of the bus stop designs will feature a shared uh bike and bus area, which is another national best practice treatment.

And then a final just image of kind of some of what the project might look like.

These are images of protected intersections.

Mentioned earlier, this is an intersection design that intended to promote safer safety for all road users by slowing turning speeds and reducing conflict points.

These have been implemented in a number of other cities, including within Alameda County, including Fremont, Pleasanton, Oakland, and Alameda, and several will be implemented within San Lander as part of this project.

So, just briefly touch on some of the community engagement schedule and funding before wrapping up here.

So, Almeida CTC has collaborated closely with city staff and other partners on community engagement throughout the development of the project.

Extensive engagement was conducted during the concept design phase to understand needs and get feedback on proposed designs.

This included mailers, five different pop-ups at busy community destinations, focus groups, and door-to-door outreach to merchants.

And the feedback included broad support for improving safety, people noting speeding and reckless driving issues and challenges crossing the street, particularly along East 14th Street and interest in streetscape enhancements.

And since that time, we've continued to have additional touch points to share design details and notify the community about the project.

This slide is a high-level summary of the project schedule.

So we're currently in the final design phase, which is we're really towards the end of it.

It's expected to conclude for the Sandlander construction package this summer, and then this fall for the East 14th construction package, and then following a period of obtaining construction funding allocations, construction bidding, actual physical out in the field construction is anticipated to start next spring for the Sandlander construction package and next winter for the Caltrans construction package.

Just to briefly touch on kind of what can be expected during construction in terms of construction impacts, the project is anticipated to require closure of one travel lane at a time during construction.

These would be limited duration in duration and not require any complete street closures, limited to a couple of blocks at a time.

There would also likely be detours or diversions for cyclists pedestrians and changes to bus stop locations needed for construction.

Almida CTC is gonna work closely with the city on the development of traffic control plans.

The city will have the ability to approve those.

And then we'll also have a public information officer during construction who will work with the city to push out messaging and notifications to residents.

And then finally, just to look at the project cost and funding, I think the key takeaways here are that while multi-jurisdictional infrastructure projects are not cheap, as these numbers indicate.

This is really thanks to both our partnership with the city on grant applications as well as the ability to leverage local transportation sales tax dollars.

So we think this is a pretty exciting story the amount of leveraging and external funds that this project's been able to track.

So that concludes the presentation, and just thank you again to the city for partnership on the project and happy to answer any questions.

Well, thank you.

So before taking questions, we'll go to public comment on this item.

Do we have any cards?

No cards.

So we'll close public comment and come back to discussion, questions, and the like.

Beginning with Councilmember Bolt.

Just pop in.

Thank you.

Appreciate your time coming here, working on this.

I've looked at a couple of the slides and then even driven down some of the paths that are complete.

And you know, not in San Leandro, but in other cities.

My my main concern is the lighting.

When they're doing this separation on the bike pass, uh the lights that are there now were originally for uh standard just cars driving on the street.

This is something that's gonna be used 24 7.

Like we have to understand that people are gonna be on their bikes, you're gonna be, it's gonna be late at night.

There's gonna be no, the lighting is gonna be insufficient at that point.

What are we doing to address that on these paths?

Yeah, that's a really good question.

Uh so we have done photometric studies looking at the existing lighting levels and where they don't meet standards for both vehicle illumination but also pedestrian illumination.

Uh we have identified uh first of all, there are just a couple of sections both along St.

Leander Boulevard and East 14th, where there's currently no street lighting on one side of the street right now.

So the project's gonna be constructing, like filling in that gap.

Okay.

Um there are also some places where uh brightening the wattage of some of the existing street lights will bring the lighting up to standards, so that the project will also be doing that.

Great.

That's awesome.

I appreciate that.

Um next.

I don't believe we have it, but I want to be clear.

We're not gonna have any of the um two-way bike lane traffic on one side of the street, correct?

We're only gonna have what you showed where you're going with the flow of traffic, because why I'm asking this, you go to Berkeley and you see two lanes of bike traffic on one side of the street, and then the cars are on this side.

Um, maybe it's a great design, but I've seen people take advantage of it.

It's too wide.

Cars decide they're going in that lane where the bikes are at.

So I just want to understand we don't have that in our scope, correct?

So there is a section in the northernmost part along San Leandro Boulevard, kind of across from Sampre Verde Park, where there would be a two-way bikeway.

Uh it would be on the west side, uh, where there's no driveways, very really no intersecting streets, so kind of no conflict points.

Okay.

That's the reason for putting the two-way bikeway there.

And it would be designed in a way where uh there really would be no way for a vehicle to get in there and use it in unintended fashion.

Um, yeah, that's all I got right now.

Thank you.

So just running with the two-way bikeways.

Will there be three ways in that section?

So two on the west side and one way on the east, and if so, why?

So um yeah, this this is an image of it.

Maybe I can.

So the street is wide enough that there is the ability to currently there is a striped bike lane in the northbound direction.

There's the ability to retain that and then also add the two-way separated bikeway on the west side.

And the reason for retaining this is to cater to cyclists of a variety of different types of confidence.

And there are some cyclists who might feel comfortable using just a striped bikeway, sort of the spandex crowd.

And also just street is wide enough to fit it.

So I think the anticipation is that you know families riding with children, more less experienced, less comfortable cyclists might use the protected facility, but uh there's different facilities for different types of design cyclists if you will.

Perfect, thank you.

Sidewalks.

The south of BART, I don't believe has sidewalks.

And the west side of San Leandro Boulevard.

North by Sempre Verde Park does not have sidewalks.

So will there be sidewalks on both sides of the street through this entire segment, or is it purely bicycle facilities?

Yeah.

So uh the areas uh south of BART station where there are some sidewalk gaps, the project will be closing those sidewalk gaps.

Uh there's some sections of existing sidewalk, but then it kind of terminates abruptly mid block, and the project will be closing those gaps.

The other area um across from Stampri Verde Park, uh, the project is not proposing to add sidewalk on the west side.

Um there's really no land uses beyond where the sidewalk terminates, it just kind of leads towards the tunnel going into Oakland.

So I think the determination was there's nowhere for people to be walking to there, and there's also some existing landscaping that would be impacted by adding a sidewalk.

What how will the East Bay Greenway connect San Leandro to Oakland?

So uh at the intersection of West Broadmoor Street, which is near the city limit, or basically the city limits, at that intersection, uh the pathway would switch over, there would be a new pedestrian signal, uh, and the pathway would switch over to the other side and continue as a two-way bikeway into Oakland.

Through the tunnel or above?

No, on the surface street adjacent to the tunnel.

On the east side, correct.

So the two-way bike lane will move from being on the west side, and it will come to the east side of San Leonard Boulevard?

That's correct.

Yeah.

That will go up and across 105th.

Uh yes.

And then down, and then continue down on the side of San Legos.

I think they call it.

Yes, that's correct.

Perfect.

Thank you.

Um East 14th.

From the design, it looks like all the businesses on the west side will lose the parking that exists in front of their businesses.

Is that correct?

Yeah, that's correct.

The project is retaining the parking on the east side only.

So those cars presumably will go on to the side streets.

Or is there another plan for what will happen for the you know the the DoorDash drivers that are picking up from the restaurants and the like?

Yeah, so we did do parking occupancy studies, parking supply studies during the concept design and identified that there is overall enough parking with within the streets and the surrounding side streets to absorb the parking demand.

Uh, in terms of short-term parking as you're describing, that would most likely happen around the corner on side streets.

Um one other thing to note is just that currently it's very hard to cross the street, so parking across the street on the other side feels very intimidating, and I think you know an objective of the project is to add new crossing opportunities, slow the street down so that the other side of the street doesn't feel an ocean away.

But it's a really wide street.

Yeah.

Um okay.

So let's talk a little bit about the parking demand study.

So for the parking demand study, tell me a little bit about how that happens.

So, like, how is it done?

Because when we just completed the point in time count, I saw a tremendous amount of parking on the side streets.

Not parking not available cars, I should say, on the side streets.

So I am still remain a little bit concerned.

Especially if new things get built, right?

We we build up some housing and the like.

Yeah, so it involves both inventorying the supply of spaces and then looking at the number of people parking at various times throughout the day, and then looking at comparing the demand to sort of industry standard occupancy levels, which are typically um looking for like an 85th percentile of parking occupied.

So you don't want underutilized parking, because that's just not not the best use of space, but you don't want people circling and looking for parking for too long.

The essence of my question really goes to time of day because what what I've seen is that by daytime uh it tends to not be as full, but after work hours, the side streets are packed, is at least my sense.

Yeah, the the parking study did look at different times of day and and even days of the week.

Okay, so I just I'll just kind of flag that as a concern.

I want to make sure that we don't end up with a situation where uh people cannot park and they need to park.

So just I'm gonna put a pin in that right now.

Um project does not appear to be fully funded.

Uh that's correct.

So what what does that mean?

That's that's a real question that I have.

Yeah, so um there are uh pots of funding within Alameda CTC's measure BB that could close the funding gap, and uh the commission is actually taking action on a conceptual funding plan, which has essentially said if no other grants come through between now and the start of construction, then measure BB funds would be programmed to close the gap.

Uh but um there's still some grant opportunities that may be out there.

Uh, we actually partnered last round with the city on an affordable housing and sustainability community grant with uh developer along East 14th, and considering that again for this cycle.

So, perfect.

So I think that the for San Leander residents, the question will be once this thing gets started, is it going to stop or the money is there to kind of organ it done?

It's gonna take two years or whatever to build to have from from start to finish.

Maybe I should ask that.

How long will it take to build from start to finish?

So uh the actual working days of construction for the I really care about elapsed time.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Uh well, yeah, so the I can follow up with like a total start to finish because there are also things such as weather delays, but um the working days are uh for the San Leander segment uh 290 days, and then for the East 14th segment, 200.

So, probably looking at a uh a year or more of construction activities.

And are those concurrent or sequential?

Uh they would uh the San Leandro um construction package is about six months ahead right now, so they would be partially concurrent.

Okay, I'm just always looking for efficiency, right?

And the impact on residents, so that you know that the more that they can suffer once instead of suffering for four years, sort of thing.

Because in the end, they'll love the outcome, but between the beginning and the ends when they'll be uh a little bit grumpy.

Well, thank you.

Uh anything else?

No.

So I think we're set.

Thank you so much for coming in and sharing an update.

Thanks for um all the partnership on the project and great questions.

Have a beautiful day.

And for everyone that came in, thank you as well for coming in to join us.

At this point in time, we're gonna move through our agenda to our next item, item 3B.

Um 3B is a Hesperian Boulevard bike lane gap closure project.

We've got assistant engineer Iman Fazi here to introduce the item.

Did I pronounce that right?

Of course, okay, thank you.

Always correct me if it's wrong.

Um hello everyone, thank you for having us here.

We will be presenting to you all the Hesperian Boulevard bike lane gap closure project.

For introductions, my name is Iman.

I am the project manager on this project, and with me here today is Cade from W Trans.

He will be presenting the design part of this presentation.

Um also with me is Miron from DKS, and she will be aiding with any um any traffic study-related questions.

Uh, we also have David from DKS to help with to support with traffic questions and um Anoop and Dan from Sandbelt to support for design questions.

In terms of the agenda, we're gonna be starting with the project scope.

We'll be moving from there to the guiding policies and the bike network and how this project fits within the bike network.

We'll also be covering the design and the traffic impacts.

Uh, I will make a little note that the order of the slides within the design and traffic impacts has been changed slightly, just in case there's any confusion.

Uh, then we'll be moving on to the budget analysis and finally ending with the schedule and next steps.

For the project scope, this project is an extent of Hesperian, starting from uh 150th Avenue to Bayfair Drive, and it's approximately 0.4 miles long.

The scope includes some lane reconfiguration, adding some class 4 bike lanes and accessible curb ramps and a pedestrian hybrid beacon, also some pedestrian improvements and signal and striping improvements.

In terms of guiding policies, why are we doing this project?

So in 2022, Vision Zero policy was adopted, and its goal is to eliminate fatalities and serious injuries by making travel safer for all modes of transportation and people of all ages and abilities.

Following that, the LRSB local roadway safety plan was adopted, which identified seven priority corridors, one of which was Hesperian.

And following that in 2024, the bike and ped master plan was adopted, which further elaborated on the LRSB.

So what are the benefits of this project?

For starters, we're enhancing the safety and comfort for oral pedestrians and bicyclists of all ages and ability, and we're also enhancing the connectivity of all the existing bike and um existing class four projects and the planned ones.

Speaking of which, uh south of our project, so our project within this uh slide is the um is red and it's circled.

Uh south of our project is the Hesperian class four bikeways project, which was presented to this committee uh a few meetings back, and that project is currently, I believe, in design.

Um, and then adjacent to our project around Fairmont is uh the Fairmont Bike lanes, which was completed in 2022.

And then along East 14th, where Hesperian and East 14th intersect, we have the project that was presented just before me, uh, the ACB Grainwee uh project, and then also along Bancroft going north, there is the crosstown corridor, which is currently in design.

And now I'll hand it off to Kate for Hesperian's design.

Okay, thank you.

Um, as Iman mentioned, my name is Kate Longa with With WTRANs.

I'm part of the design team for this project.

So let's take a look at how Hesperian will evolve along this project, starting with the southern end of the corridor.

This is the proposed cross section between Fairmont and Grace.

As you can see, the number of vehicle lanes will remain the same, and the width of the median will be reduced to provide a separate or protected bike lane.

At the intersection of Hesperian and Fairmont, the city is considering two different alternatives for how Northbound bikes will approach and cross the intersection.

Both alternatives will feature traffic signal upgrades to align signals with the new intersection geometry as well as accessibility improvements for pedestrian crossings.

Left turn bike boxes are also included in each alternative to reduce conflicts between bikes and vehicles in the intersection.

Alternative one, shown here would introduce a buffered bike lane between the right turn lane and the through lanes on the approach to the intersection.

So here are some examples of these bike lane treatments that have already been installed elsewhere.

The images on the left and the top right are actually at Fairmont and East 14th nearby.

And these treatments will improve visibility of the bike lanes within conflict areas where bikes will mix with vehicle traffic.

And on the bottom right is an example of a two-stage left turn box for bikes.

Here is alternative two for Hesperian and Fairmont.

And this approach maintains separation between the bike lane and right turning vehicles all the way through the approach to the intersection, taking elements of protected intersections as well, like the East Bay Greenway.

So bicycles are routed onto that expanded curb section there with space for bikes and pedestrians, and a dedicated bicycle crossing would be provided parallel to the crosswalk, and right turns would be held for a time to give bikes and pedestrians protected crossing time.

So here's an example of a sidewalk level bike lane.

This one's in Concord, so it's similar to those in alternative two and give you an idea of what alternative two would look like, showing the bike lanes transitioning onto the sidewalk there, along with the parallel pedestrian and bike crossings on the bottom left.

Here is an overhead plan view of the conceptual design of alternative two at Hesperian and Fairmont.

The bike lane transition onto the sidewalk is on the southeast corner.

The north is to the right of the page here.

So that's the bottom left of the screen.

And the you can also see the turnboxes for each approach and the green striping all over the place.

Here is an overview of the proposed changes in the north part of the corridor from Grace to 150th.

So two through vehicle lanes are still retained in each direction, and dedicated left turn and right turn lanes would be removed at Grace and Louise to provide a space for the bike lanes to continue along Hesperian and make that connection, close that gap there.

So here's a rendering of the crossing at Grace Street, or a pedestrian hybrid beacon would be installed, also known as a PHB.

So it's proposed along with crosswalk upgrades for visibility and to prioritize safe pedestrian crossings.

You know, this corridor is experiences high speeds and high traffic volumes, and this will be a key safe crossing.

The signal will remain dark until activated by a pedestrian push button.

Pedestrians would have an exclusive signal phase two cross with this signal at GRACE.

And there are some other examples of PHBs nearby in San Leandro.

There's one on Davis, there's one also at East 14th and 144th for reference.

Here's another treatment under consideration, raised buffer island, which would provide physical separation between bike lanes and vehicle lanes to provide comfort for cyclists.

And here is part of the conceptual design as well.

It shows where those raised islands would be typically placed along the corridor.

They're really included wherever it's practical between intersections and leaving space for driveways and other access points.

So DKS Associates prepared a traffic study for the project corridor in November 2025, and their study explored the traffic impact of a road diet along Hesperian and really informed our design options.

So DKS is present for any questions on what was considered in the analysis, and this summarizes their analysis, which indicates that vehicle delay and intersection level of service will be within acceptable limits under the proposed project condition.

And in addition, the project corridor as a whole is projected to improve from LOS F to E with proposed mitigations.

So that votes well.

And with that, I'll pass it back to Iman to discuss project budget.

So how are we affording all of this?

In terms of does that, sorry, in terms of design, project cost, um, we are look for pre-design, we were look we are looking at about 60,000.

And then in terms of the design cost, we're looking at approximately 790,000.

And I do want to note that that doesn't cover um includes some contingency that we are taking into account.

And this totals to approximately 850,000.

And then available funding.

I would like to note that is for design only.

Um the funds, we did secure two grants, one ACTC grant for the uh from the Alameda County Transportation Commission for 225,000.

We also did secure an MTC grant, uh, Metropolitan Transportation Commission grant for a hundred thousand, and then we have some city funds uh totaling approximately 525,000, which in total leaves uh gives us 850 approximately 850,000 in total funding to um fulfill the projected project cost.

The estimated construction cost is approximately 5.2 million.

Um, and in terms of what we're planning to do to try to fund that is we have some um grants that we're planning to apply to uh to fulfill that estimated um construction cost, and then project schedule and next steps.

So right now we are presenting this project to the facilities and transportation committee.

Uh we are planning on presenting this project to the bicycle and pedestrian advisory committee in the upcoming meeting.

Um I'm not sure yet if it's March or April.

Um and then we are at with those two meetings after the those two committee meetings, we will be addressing all comments and from both commissions and advancing the project design accordingly.

And we are expecting to have final design by end of this year, December 2026.

And uh bid award and construction will be dependent on uh when we secure project funding.

And with that, thank you all for listening to us, and I'll open the ground for questions.

Thank you for your presentation.

Let's check to see if we have any public comment on this item.

No cards received.

So we will close public comment and come back to committee members for questions.

Thank you for the presentation.

Um, excited for this.

I know it's been a long time coming.

We've done some stuff around the on the 150th and on uh Fairmont, and it's kind of like uh, yeah, let's get it done.

Um can you walk me through the LOS F in E?

At first, I thought we had the grade of C or D, and then I heard LOS, and then we were at an F in, and then Cade said, This is great, and I was like, whoa, now I'm confused.

So can you walk through what that means?

Um I'll give a brief explanation.

I'll ask Maryland to add to it.

Um, but for the difference here is that this slide the these LOS look specifically at each intersection individually in the AM and PM peak hours, and then with this slide, we're looking at the overall arterial level of service.

So we're looking at the overall travel time from the start the first intersection to the set uh to the second intersection, and measuring that.

Oh, yeah.

Sorry.

Miran, um, my question is what does F mean?

What does LOS mean?

What are the C's and the D's in that?

Um so LOS means level of service.

Um so we looked at uh a couple of metrics for this project, which what was the intersection level of service, the other was overall arterial level of service.

Um, and so level of service looks at the delay at the intersection when we're looking at individual intersections, and for arterials, it's looking at the speed that people are traveling with uh from one side of the corridor to the other, and that does take into account the delays that are experienced at the intersections as well.

So level of service A means it's your best case scenario where uh your your delay is minimal, and then F is the other side of the spectrum, your delay is much higher.

Okay, maybe I misspoke on you, Cade, so I don't want to do that.

I thought you said we're gonna be at F, and you're kind of excited about F.

I'm not excited about sitting at lights or so.

Can we walk through that part at least and understand why we want a further delay?

Is it for safety?

We don't want further delay.

So, so um what this table is showing us a comparison between the existing arterial level of service and um the existing plus a mitigated version of the project.

So the scenarios that we looked at is existing scenarios, so what is our roadway?

How does our roadway operate under current conditions?

And then we look at how does our roadway operate with the project implemented without adding any other mitigations, and then we also add um, so how if it does get worse, how do we improve it, right?

So we add mitigation factors, and so this table is comparing the existing with the mitigated project scenario for the mitigations for this project.

What we did was um signal timing improvements along the corridor.

Generally, as Cade mentioned, we're not really changing the number of lanes in both um sides, and so the signal timing uh mitigations that we modeled ended up showing an improvement from the existing um in the northbound direction from Bayfair to East 14th from F to E.

Um, and so that's what you're looking at.

But otherwise, the um the ease for the southbound uh remain the same.

Okay, that makes it clearer for me.

Thank you.

Is there a number equated to A, B, C, D, E?

Okay.

So what so if we're at F, how long am I sitting?

When I get to E, how long am I sitting?

So I don't have it on top of my head, but but yes, there is uh there is a delay number, and for arterial level of service, there's a speed associated with it, and uh we we can provide that.

Is our goal to get to A?

No, no, because um because we we're operating under already constrained um uh situation, so our hope is that we're not making things worse.

Got it, okay.

Fair enough.

Um, I hope our goal is to also improve.

Not and I'm not putting that on anybody, but just as a thought process, let's uh I mean I want B's, I guess.

We're we're definitely improving um other metrics like safety, um, comfort for bikes, and so uh operations is just one more thing that we're looking at.

Thank you.

That was a great explanation because I was able to follow it, so at least for me it was great.

Thank you.

Um, my next question is around um funding.

You had numbers up there when it comes to the design cost and uh the overall construction cost.

My question is is you're asking us, or at this point we're deciding on what type of intersection we're gonna have, whether we're gonna have a you know very fortified type of intersection or not.

How does that price change?

Like, or let me back up.

If we have that really cool looking one that you showed from Concord, is that the 5.2 million?

Um I will hand that question to you because I'm not entirely sure.

Everyone, so with the added uh improvements at the corners, it'll increase additional safety for the cyclists as they're approaching that intersection.

So the added cost would be included in that 5.2 million.

So 5.2 is like you get the Cadillac.

Okay.

Well, that's good to know.

Sometimes we hear it, and then all of a sudden, no, well it's really eight, right?

You're like, whoa, well, what do I want?

Safety or or do we need to pull money?

So great that that's good because I really do like that that type of interchange, um, especially this is the perfect one.

When you have that turn signal, like we've done such a great job to separate the bike lane from the traveling cars, that's Fairmont going east.

But if you don't have that little box out right there, people are gonna be really nervous about getting in.

Secondly, if you don't have this type, in my opinion, my minimal opinion on this.

I know you guys are the experts.

If you don't have that type of turn, you got people turning right into that uh wannabe separation, and I've seen it where they go over it.

So I think this would do a lot of good for us in that that turn scenario.

So I'm glad that's within the 5.2.

I'll stop there.

Sorry.

You were on a roll.

I love it.

I don't know.

We're gonna have to come back for seconds.

Okay.

Um, so I want to roll where he was rolling.

Um, and in particular, and this applied to the East Bay Greenway, so we'll just kind of have the discussion here.

When it comes to the entry points of the bike into this concrete bunker, how how wide is that entry point?

Is it just a foot or two?

It's definitely more than a foot or two.

I don't know if the number of I had no ballpark.

I mean, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Now come on in, join the party.

Dan Leary with Sandbale Civil Engineers.

That little ramp you see on the left-hand side of the curb extension or ballbout can be as narrow as four feet, but what we try to go six feet wide for the bikes to enter, depending on the geometry, and we have to leave room for the pedestrians too.

So we kind of balance how much rooms for the pedestrians, how much room for the you see the pedestrians are kind of sharing that space.

So we have to think about all of that.

And each corner is a little bit different, but it'll be four feet minimum.

Yeah, the reason that I ask, I always get nervous about cars going in there.

So when uh council member Bolt was talking about this, I have seen it with my own eyes live occurring on San Lander Boulevard at West Broadmoor.

I've seen the cars go through the bike lane.

So I am sensitive to that reality on how broad these things are.

Um, and I know people aren't supposed to do it.

Right.

I also worry about drunk drivers making that turn too fast and going up onto that curb because most of the car can get into that section.

So just these are the things that that I worry about that later turn into liability for the city.

Yeah, sorry, Mayor to interrupt you.

JC in my city engineer, that is a very good question.

It is a uh industry-wide uh issue that we're dealing with.

I know uh one, the width between now, this is not the actual um situation.

If you can go to the slide with the uh little islands, Iman or no.

Yeah, that one down will do.

Um that's what you're talking about.

More, uh, not anyone.

I'm worried about this as well.

Right.

This is kind of what uh committee member Bolt was talking about, and this is the type of width that I have seen cars go through over at West Broadmore.

Right.

So that's that's part of what I'm raising.

Right.

But the other part that I'm raising is I like the idea of the bulb outs, right?

It's just inherently provides more safety.

But the entryways, now that we have all of these beautiful ADA accessible ramps, that's easy access for vehicles onto sidewalks.

Got it.

Right.

So I'm I'm looking at the the multiplicity of risk factors and not just oh, can the wheelchair get up onto the ramp?

But what other risk are we introducing through these new designs and making sure that we're not creating too much risk for the city?

Particularly if, for example, in the middle of that bull out, there's a lamp post.

So we made it easy for the car to get up onto the ballbout and they hit a lamppost and it kills someone, and someone says, Well, why do you design it that way?

No, that's a very astute uh uh observation.

It's it is a concern that the industry is addressing as a whole to address this one in particular.

Um the one, this the width does have to be a minimum width uh to allow the street sweepers in there to get there and sweep between the curb uh and the median.

We do want to limit that to about six feet total, because the six feet is about comfortable for a bike to traverse uh comfortably, but it's too narrow.

Well, it's not too narrow, but it's narrow enough so that it would likely dissuade someone from going in there.

It's not wide enough for a car to fit in there comfortably.

So that five to six foot width is like the kind of the desired width between a raised median and the curb, it still allows the street sweepers to get in there and a comfortable bike lane yet kind of dis uh dissuades uh vehicles from getting in there.

The one where you noted is uh the curb ramp that designers are looking at the width of the curb ramp, uh the angle of the curb ramp, which which with what it receives, the bike, and there's certain design um strategies in which you would make it less inviting uh for a car to drive up there because we do I do see what you can saying it's it's basically just inviting a ramp up to go uh to the sidewalk.

But uh it is something that we try to balance it that's the challenge, right?

How do you balance a design a roadway design between all modes?

Uh vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians, and uh that's what the industry is faced with nowadays, and it design keeps evolving in reaction to these kind of concerns that we see.

Um we've talked about street sweepers.

My sensitivity on street sweepers as a constraint, it is my understanding, and I could be wrong that there are smaller street sweepers that have been designed and are available because I would not want to say that we have to build a bike lane as wide as a car can drive down because we need it to handle a street sweeper.

If we can pick an alternative type of vehicle to achieve the same end and provide greater safety, because I mean, I'm sure it has happened.

I'm not an expert on this, I'm sure it's happened that a car has driven down a bike lane, protected bike lane, and killed somebody.

Right.

So it's I always want to be very careful about not letting what I consider false constraints get in the way of optimal design.

We have to make the decision.

Do we want to spend the money on a new street sweeper?

Right?

That's that's for us to decide.

But if it's if it is a an unnecessary risk, let's make sure we call it out.

That actually you'd be happy to hear that we are we already purchased a mini street sweeper, so our street maintenance uh crew does utilize it today.

So you may see it every once in a while.

It's it's not the regular size street sweeper that you see, it's made sp and the industry.

This is an example of how the industry adapts uh to problems that come up when you build these things.

So the industry developed these smaller street sweeper, I believe the width is four feet, uh, that are designed specifically to address these kind of situations.

So we do have one that's in operation, it does uh sweep the bike lanes that have the bollards, you know, the flexible posts that you see like on Davis and things like that.

So it's it's used to uh sweep uh protected bike lanes in that way.

So we do have one in service.

Okay, thank you.

Um I am curious about um the same thing, ABCD EFG, Q and X.

So if we can go to slides 18 and 19.

And by the way, thank you for you guys who were an early adopter of the templates and the colors.

And you have pagination and you have dates.

You guys are awesome, thank you.

Uh I know it's such a high standard, but thank you for for meeting the standard.

Um, so I saw this and I said, What?

So let's walk through this because this clearly is important.

And the reason that I was trying to follow what you were saying, and my recollection is that in sometimes the traffic gets worse, and I think that's what this shows, but maybe you can tell me what that if that am I if I'm reading that correctly.

So if I'm going, if I'm at the intersection of Hesperian and 150th, and I think that means that I am facing towards the uh whatever that uh no, I'm facing not Hoffbrow is gonna be on my right side, but I'm facing towards the uh the diner.

Oh, is that okay?

Yes, I'm getting a head uh a head shake.

So right now, at I'm gonna assume that's 7.45 in the morning or 8.15, it's currently a B, and that will be going to a C.

So it'll be getting worse.

That's correct.

That's correct.

Okay.

And when it gets worse, because that's already that little stretch right in there is a total pain to deal with.

I believe there should be a giant traffic circle there, by the way.

I've been advocating that for 30 years, and so I'll advocate until I'm done.

Um I get I get concerned because people already do bad things there.

I may have done that once.

Okay, so they're blocking the crosswalks, because they just they have to get across.

How is that factored into this?

That you know what what is already kind of like seemingly maybe the timing isn't that bad, but because people do bad things and we're we're creating more stress in the system.

How does that factor into this?

The reason the level of service gets a little bit worse, it is within the acceptable range, going from B to C is not unacceptable, but does get worse because we're optimizing the timing for having uh leading pedestrian intervals, allow the pedestrians a little more time to get across before the cars pass through.

So when we start adding some of the pedestrian bicycle features into the signal, it would affect the level of service a little bit.

The challenge that I'm seeing is that cars are parked in the crosswalk.

And I'll expand to that.

I'm sorry, Jason, my city engineer again.

So we staff was concerned about this, or we call this area the triangle.

Uh I personally drive through this area a lot, so I know what you're talking about.

Uh we asked, we scrutinized this a lot, and uh, I think the consultants will tell you if we did.

Uh, there was extensive modeling uh where you basically simulate the traffic uh under conditions.

We looked at the queuing because queuing is a very big concern here uh because the triangle, each of the legs of the triangle is so short.

Uh so based on the analysis, uh we didn't see that we were gonna make things exasperate where a problem is is unacceptable.

Now, what our consultant said B2C is an acceptable uh level there, it is actually codified, so in the in the municipal code, uh it says uh acceptable level of service is a level service D uh for most of uh intersections now around some areas of the city, which actually this is one area of the city around our transit area or priority development areas.

Uh the the municipal code actually allows us to go up to level service E, and that's again to balance, you know, uh development around our transit areas to uh encourage uh development around there.

Uh so the level of service uh goes up uh one notch.

Uh so that I just wanted to point that out.

But um we are concerned, uh I am concerned again as a driver of that area.

So we are looking at you know how these improvements are gonna impact uh the the very sensitive coordination between the three intersections uh there at the triangle, giant traffic circle.

With a giant piece of art in the middle, okay.

Um I think that covers all of my things.

Did that trigger anything?

And I do have one more, but please go while I can so I can organize my thoughts.

Thank you.

Okay, so just thinking about that, hearing it more, we go B to C or C to D one step.

But I but in my head, it's um as we push to be a more bike and ped-friendly city, we'll ultimately remove the cars, putting more people on bikes, making it safer.

And at some point, we're gonna be in that position where we're going the other way because people feel safe and on these streets and these corners that we talk about that are so can be so frustrating to to traverse.

So I didn't want to lose that as we kind of drill down on this, and we're saying, ah, we're making it tougher now, but the ultimate goal is that we're changing that whole idea and getting more people on bikes.

I just that's what I wanted to say.

And thank you all for for what you what you're doing.

Thank you.

And that's why we're gonna build a big circle.

Yeah.

Um the injury network, and we've got various hot spots in this city, and I'm not sure really who to address this to.

Um, I know that Hesperian is one of those corridors, but typically it's not like the entire street, it's typically very specific intersections that tend to be the problem.

So I'm I know I'm putting on the spot, but like where along Hisparian is the real problem, if you happen to know.

Um, yeah, as part of um before we got into the conceptual design, we did look at um collision rates along the corridor.

I don't remember the specifics, I don't have it on me, but we can get that over to you.

I remember it wasn't um, it was not high, it was either around state average or below, I believe, but I will um we can provide that, yeah.

Okay, and that I don't do we have that on our website under the ArcGIS maps.

Oh, I don't know if it's there, but I do know that within the LRSB, we it does highlight um so the that's the link to the RSB.

So if we can oh that has the highlights all the different spots that along Hesperian and all the other networks that are high energy.

Okay, yeah, I don't believe it's on our GIS, but it is the hotspot map is in the LRS local roadway safety plan, excuse me.

Um but we will certainly get that uh we can get that heat map to you for the high injury network.

And I am curious, and I know I've asked Director Marquise this at various points in time.

Like, how has it evolved through time?

I know we had a lot of accidents on San Leo Boulevard in the last couple of years.

Um I'm aware of one specific accident that uh involved bicycle uh right there at that Hisparian triangle that we're talking about.

Um but it just it would be useful as we think about um the nature of accidents and the number of accidents, the frequency of accidents as we prioritize there's lots of different locations throughout the city to just enable us to ask more effective questions.

Um but this is this is fantastic.

So thank you for all the work that you're doing.

Is that it?

Okay, so we will close this item out.

Thank you for coming.

At this point in time, we will move to committee member comments.

Is there anything that you would like to offer today?

Seeing none, I will simply offer that I have asked uh council member Simon to join this committee, and so we will go through the process of getting him formally appointed and invited to these meetings.

Uh and with that, the time is 5 02 and we are adjourned.