Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-05-20 Rail Committee Summary MinutesRAIL COMMITTEE SUMMARY MINUTES Page 1 of 12 Special Meeting May 20, 2025 The Rail Committee of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Community Meeting Room and by virtual teleconference at virtual teleconference at 6:00 p.m. Present In-Person: Burt (Chair), Lauing, Lythcott-Haims Present Virtually: Absent: None Call to Order Chair Burt called the meeting to order. The clerk called roll and declared all members were present. Public Comments 1. Mayra A stated she is part of a group of concerned parents deeply invested in the safety of children crossing train tracks, especially at the Churchill crossing. She highlighted the urgent need to improve the island space at that intersection for student bikers and requested that it be addressed over the summer break. She mentioned that cars are parking illegally in the 2 parking spots on the right-hand side heading north on Churchill, which has been reported to the City, and she requested it be addressed and that there possibly be bigger signs clear of branches and pavement markings. 2. Vandana A voiced that she has been driving her children to school because biking on the Churchill and Alma intersection scares her. She mentioned that she finds the crossing to be horrific and that bikers are usually spilling over on the street because there is no island. She requested a longer greenlight signal time on Churchill during peak hours and a countdown timer for all signals. 3. John M spoke of being reassured that the City will implement quiet zones ASAP. He commented that his concerns are based on health and safety issues related to excessive noise pollution 20 hours a day. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 2 of 12 Sp. Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 5/20/2025 Verbal Updates on Interagency Activities A. Caltrain Government and Community Affairs Manager Caltrain Navdeep Dhaliwal announced that Caltrain completed the installation of the 9½-foot fencing on the west side of the tracks from Churchill to the Palo Alto station. The operating contractor is working with the fencing contractor to address a few minor punch list items. Once resolved, the project will be formally closed. The rail sentry system was installed at Churchill recently. She shared data collected from Broadway Burlingame. There have been zero incursions since the installation, which is an optimistic datapoint that can be brought to the corridor in planning for the long-term grade separation projects. She hoped to provide a rail sentry system update to the Rail Committee in the near future. Mayor Lauing asked what fencing remains to be done. Manager Dhaliwal answered that she believes the 9½-foot fencing can be installed at some places. This is Phase 1 implementation but there can be a future Phase 2. She expressed that she hopes Caltrain will ensure that there will be additional funding and grant opportunities to fence not only in the Palo Alto corridor but corridor wide. City Manager Ed Shikada noted that all the publicly exposed sides of the Caltrain corridor have the taller fence with winglets from end to end within Palo Alto with the exception of the right of way adjacent to residential backyard fences. Aside from the crossings and stations, those are the only areas without the taller fence. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims inquired if the right of ways adjacent to residential backyard fences can be done and if there will be negotiation with property owners. City Manager Shikada responded that he thinks funding and the practicality of having one fence immediately next to another have not been resolved. Chair Burt added that putting the 9-foot fences with winglets alongside the private wooden fences has been discussed because it is an issue due to a suicide a number of years ago. He remarked that he does not know why the bike and ped overpass at Embarcadero did not receive new fencing. Manager Dhaliwal answered that she does not believe the bike and ped overpass at Embarcadero is part of the punch list. She can find out if there are plans to put fencing there. If there are no plans to, she can find out why. If there are plans to do it, she will find out the potential timeline. Chair Burt remarked that is the highest risk location and he wants it to be investigated right away. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 3 of 12 Sp. Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 5/20/2025 B. VTA Senior Engineer Office of Transportation Ripon Bhatia announced there are no updates. C. City Staff Senior Engineer Office of Transportation Ripon Bhatia noted that progress is being made on the quiet zone projects. The Palo Alto Avenue project has progressed to bidding, and it has been transitioned to Public Works. A contractor is being procured to perform the additional required work to implement the quiet zone. Staff is planning to award the project as part of the overlay and other routine concrete improvements. It early June, the award will be recommended to Council. On April 16, there was a public outreach meeting for Churchill, Meadow, and Charleston crossings. They plan is to finalize the concept plans and the report and bring it back to the Rail Committee at the next meeting. Regarding Churchill and Alma Street Section 130 improvements, signal work is planned for the first weekend of June. It is planned that Caltrain and the City’s remaining work will be completed during the summer, so the majority of the project work should be completed by the end of the summer. For Charleston and Alma, staff has been working to procure the consultant for the design of the required safety improvements. Diagnostic meetings for the project are planned for late summer/early fall. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims requested an overview of the improvements for Churchill and Alma Street Section 130 and the Charleston and Alma safety improvements. She queried if anything is in the works to address the island and signaling at Churchill and Alma. Senior Engineer Bhatia answered that the Alma and Churchill improvements will include signal improvements, advanced signal preemption, improvements to the pedestrian crossing at the railroad tracks, signage, and striping, and possibly widening the ramps. A summary of the project has been provided to the Committee. He explained why he thinks a lot of concrete work remains, which is scheduled to occur over the June 6 weekend. He noted that he will coordinate with the project engineer and find out if the island and signaling elements can be incorporated for Churchill and Alma. Improvements for Charleston and Alma have not yet been determined, though it will be similar to Churchill. Diagnostic meetings are being coordinated, which he hoped will occur late summer/early fall. Chair Burt questioned if there will be some redoing east of Alma on Churchill. The massive number of bikes and pedestrians queuing up in the morning and when school lets out is a chaotic hazard. He wondered if there are plans to reduce 1 or 2 on-street parking spaces for a bike box. Senior Engineer Bhatia replied that as part of the Alma safety improvement project, signage and striping improvements will provide for green bike lane markings up to, he believed, Mariposa or Castilleja. The Churchill Avenue Bike Enhancement Project will extend the offroad Class 1 bike path and the signage and striping along Churchill. There is room behind the SUMMARY MINUTES Page 4 of 12 Sp. Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 5/20/2025 crosswalk for bike storage and queuing on Alma and Churchill, which will be marked. A bike box in front of the through lane may not be appropriate. Chair Burt added that it is one of the most dangerous locations in the city for pedestrians and bikes. He requested that the plan be provided to the Committee, that a review be agendized, and that there be videos showing how hazardous and acute the intersection is. Senior Engineer Bhatia responded that that are a lot of right-of-way constraints as Palo Alto does not own the right of way. There are grade separation projects at the location which will be an ultimate improvement, so it will depend on the level of improvements in the interim that they would like to perform. Chair Burt voiced that he wants everyone to understand the problem. If treated as a must-do, actions may emerge that may not otherwise. City Manager Ed Shikada expressed that there is coordination with Caltrain and there will be a coordinated report to the Committee. Co-Founder Californians Advocating Responsible Rail Design (CARRD) Nadia Naik noted that the traffic signal and signage is up but the light is not working for a right turn on red to go southbound on Alma and traffic backs up to El Camino. She suggested the light timing be considered when it is up and running. Traffic also bubbled over to the new painted bike lanes and turn lanes at El Camino. Senior Engineer Bhatia added that there are capacity constraints at that intersection, and there will be a delay regardless of improvements. Improvements are done to improve safety. CARRD Co-Founder Naik mentioned that she does not think the length of the turn pocket that is painted is going to be the length of the needed turn pocket. Chair Burt remarked that he thinks there will be a backup of cars in the bike lane on El Camino as a result. He stated that he wants potential problems with the right on red to be considered. Senior Engineer Bhatia commented that as part of the Churchill Avenue Bikeway Enhancement Project, there will be improvements associated with El Camino and Churchill. Chair Burt expressed that upon completion of the bikeway improvement there may be more bicyclists on the north side of Churchill. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims requested that a video of traffic be implemented for Churchill & Alma as well as for El Camino Way & El Camino Real intersections to evaluate the safety for bikers. Senior Engineer Bhatia mentioned that will be recognized for the Bike and Ped Transportation Plan updates. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 5 of 12 Sp. Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 5/20/2025 Verbal Updates on Interagency Activities Public Comment Roland remarked that the save transcript button is disabled. He spoke of the sentry system being the intrusion detection component in a quad gate system. He wondered if Caltrain plans to use the sentry system to automatically stop approaching trains in the event of an obstruction on the tracks. Chair Burt shared that the current system is for the rail sentry detection to go to the Caltrain dispatch area and that they then determine if a train should stop. G stated she has video footage of Churchill and Alma demonstrating the concerns being raised. She noted that not only are there physical constraints but there are moving violations and cars parked illegally. She requested the City consider a crossing guard at the intersection. Agenda Items 1. Summary of the Draft Public Outreach and Engagement Plan of the grade separation project at Churchill Avenue, Meadow Drive, and Charleston Road crossings. Senior Engineer Office of Transportation Ripon Bhatia displayed slides. There is an engineering firm onboard for the preliminary engineering 15-percent development plan. The grade separation project involves 3 crossings – Churchill Avenue, Meadow Drive, and Charleston Road. Churchill crossings include a pedestrian and bicycle crossing at Seale Avenue to Peers Park. He provided a history of Council actions in June 2024. Staff will look into refining the concepts in the 15 percent, keeping the project goal in mind. The design firm will do an RFP, and an engineering firm will be consulted to look into the 15-percent level design development. Staff wants to bring the iterative design for Rail Committee review in the fall of 2025, perhaps at the next Rail Committee meeting. Prior to that, community engagement will be considered. Based on the Rail Committee’s decisions, staff will present it to Council for direction. Then the selected alternatives will be advanced. The objective is to present 1 alternative for each crossing at the 15-percent level, and based on Rail Committee’s review, staff will look into developing alternatives to the next 15-percent level and for decision point 2 for an alternative to be selected to proceed into 35-percent design and environmental phase during 2027. Kimley Horn Vice President Jill Gibson displayed slides outlining the draft public outreach and engagement plan, which is a framework for targeted engagement over the next couple years. The purpose is to communicate key project information, provide opportunities for community input, and foster understanding. The components include outreach strategies, identifying partners and community members who should be engaged, identifying activities, and tracking, evaluating, and reporting evaluating participants’ input. They are working through an integrated project team approach with Caltrain and the City. The role of the engagement team is to facilitate community outreach, strengthen partnerships, collect and synthetize community feedback, foster 2-way communication, be transparent and responsive throughout the project, SUMMARY MINUTES Page 6 of 12 Sp. Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 5/20/2025 and relay information and community feedback to policymakers, decision-makers, Rail Committee, and Council. The 5 goals are to educate and inform, engage, solicit information, share feedback, and make recommendations. She furnished a draft of the engagement schedule. There will be community meetings in late August, and the feedback will be presented to the Rail Committee and Council. There will be open houses and technical workshops during the 15-percent design phase, and information will return to Rail Committee and go to Council for direction on alternatives to move through environmental. There are 2 decision points for the conceptual development phase. There will be 2 community meetings, and the refined concept will be presented to Rail Committee to advance alternatives to 15 percent. In the 15- percent phase, there will be 2 technical workshops and an open house, which will lead to Rail Committee and Council providing direction on which alternative to advance to environmental. During the preliminary engineering and environmental phase, 2 community meetings are planned and there will be an opportunity for 6 technical workshops and 1 open house over about a 1½-year period. The communication strategy is to leverage existing networks, provide interactive accessible content, provide language translation services, and manage and maintain a community inquiry tracker. Tools will include digital and printed collateral, short-form content, brochures, flyers, and surveys. They are working on developing a project website and social media. A draft is located at caltrain.com/projects/cmcgs for Churchill, Meadow, and Charleston grade separation (she welcomed feedback for a shorter name), which will be linked to the City’s website, etc. Caltrain and the City selected TYLin as the design team, and they will advance the concepts through 15-percent design. They will work on concept refinement, provide preliminary technical analysis, and update the conceptual design plan, which will return to Rail Committee, and then work through the 15-percent design and Caltrain will lead an independent cost estimate and schedule to inform decision making for decision point 2 and final report. Senior Engineer Bhatia voiced that the item will return to Rail Committee to review the refined concepts. In November, staff will share the scope for the 35-percent preliminary engineering and environmental documentation. There will be updates at every Rail Committee meeting. It is hoped that the final 15-percent design will be wrapped up in early spring and that it will return to Rail Committee in May for recommendations to Council related to the 35-percent design and environmental documentation. He requested feedback on the engagement plan so the final plan can be prepared. City Manager Ed Shikada discussed the importance of proceeding to the next phase as it relates to property impacts to residents. Co-Founder Californians Advocating Responsible Rail Design (CARRD) Nadia Naik asked what the legal requirement is for the percentage of project completion before disclosing real estate impacts. City Manager Shikada commented that he does not have that information but properties are being affected and that information should be shared with residents. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 7 of 12 Sp. Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 5/20/2025 Mayor Lauing inquired if new information from the community might be discovered that will help influence decision-making, how underrepresented groups will be identified, how the Rail Committee could be of assistance, and if having many meetings will be productive for the community. Vice President Gibson expressed that she has no preconceived ideas of what might be learned from the community. The approach is to communicate the tradeoffs and provide an understanding of the different alternatives. Underrepresented groups may consist of folks who do not traditionally attend public meetings. The Rail Committee could help in promotion and leveraging networks. She outlined the meetings that will occur in the future, and there will be integration of the technical work and community engagement in advance of Rail Committee updates. Public Comment: 1. Melinda M queried what community feedback will make a difference in the decision- making. She requested information related to timelines, budgets, how quiet zones will interact with grade separation, and how construction will affect neighborhoods. 2. Mayra A queried how it will be ensured that grade separation will take place and who will provide the continuity to do it. 3. John M questioned if the City has a choice to not proceed with grade separation and use $800M to $1B for something else or that high-speed rail pay its fair share. He considered the most effective, least disruptive, and most expensive to be a tunnel. He remarked that he may relocate due to the disruption. 4. Roland stated that building a viaduct over Meadow and Charleston would not require shooflies. He asked if the funds will come from 2016 Measure B and, if so, whether the funds will come from the $700M earmarked for grade separation and if it is possible to reach out to the Bay Area Council, which recently met with Japan, for information related to doing the project at a fraction of the cost and in a way that will not interrupt service. 5. Eric N requested that there be good renderings and drawings on the web. 6. David M suggested that Paly students be involved in public outreach and engagement. He recommended that there be signage at the crossings and in the neighborhoods to inform folks of upcoming meetings. He commented that he finds it important to close Churchill to car traffic. 7. Penny E inquired if the raw data will be included in the reports, if possible staff transitions might delay the project, and if the City is considering funding sources other than federal. She voiced that she finds it challenging to find project materials and suggested there be a new website for those new to the topic. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 8 of 12 Sp. Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 5/20/2025 Councilmember Lythcott-Haims remarked that Meadow-Charleston should be not be combined for community meeting purposes, and she requested that each have their own meeting. She suggested a way to do the first community meeting to address both community feedback and the technicalities. She noted that she does not see in the plan an acknowledgement of the potential anxiety and anger of community members that might be negatively impacted by the potential plans. She addressed the language fact sheets being provided in English and Spanish and requested that other languages also be considered. Providing childcare at meetings may spur participation of underrepresented groups. Mayor Lauing voiced that he wants the community to be informed of what has not been decided and the decision points that will be made. He spoke of the possibility of not proceeding and funds possibility not being available. He expressed that the technical elements may not be crucial in the conceptual development stage. He suggested there be a way to get information on eminent domain. He queried if the meetings can be videorecorded. Vice President Gibson answered that she does not see an issue with videotaping the meetings. CARRD Co-Founder Naik expressed that Councilmember Lythcott-Haims’ raised important points. The new website should indicate where the funding for the current work will come from. She discussed the importance of continuing the work. It is important to show the interaction of quiet zones, grade separations, and safety improvements. There should be an explanation of the alternatives removed from consideration. She noted that she wants a better job to be done with videos on the website, discussing different/better construction methods, explaining what is happening with high-speed rail, explaining traffic patterns, communicating that Churchill is lower priority, and communicating what has and has not been decided. Chair Burt expected that there will be a mix of folks attending the meetings, those new to the subject and those who are familiar with it. He noted that he is concerned about presenting past and present urgencies for doing grade separations. He spoke of the set of alternatives and Caltrain’s objectives and the City’s objectives, and Caltrain will attempt to reconcile those objectives. The project goals are to improve safety and mobility and minimize environmental and property impacts, which he wants addressed in depth. The number of trains and the schedule needs to be explained. The possibility of having 8 trains an hour needs to be planned for. In 2026, Caltrain will update their projections. He spoke of the possible increase in California’s population and there maybe being enough time to do what needs to be done before traffic gridlock occurs. Why certain alternatives are being considered, what is needed, and what is affordable needs to be explained to folks. He discussed why Charleston and Meadow have been prioritized over Churchill. Costs have increased. State and federal grants are part of the reason to move forward, as design dollars will likely eventually fund construction. There are potential revenue sources at the state and regional levels. The aforementioned information needs to be shared with folks before having a meaningful conversation. In the timelines are a couple important decisions to make, one of which is potentially mothballing Churchill, and he asked when in the process that will be addressed. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 9 of 12 Sp. Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 5/20/2025 Senior Engineer Bhatia replied that the intent is to prioritize Meadow and Charleston upon getting to 35 percent and on completion of the environmental documentation. There will be some level of information at decision point 1 in Q3. Subsequent to that decision, if Council desires to approach both alternatives for Meadow-Charleston, it will be at decision point 2. There will be completion of the PE and environmental phases for Meadow, Charleston, and Churchill due to the funding agreement in place. Chair Burt commented that a big issue is minimizing property impacts on Meadow-Charleston, and he questioned when the decision will be made for an underpass or the hybrid. He asked if TYLin will negotiate the designs with Caltrain. Senior Engineer Bhatia answered that staff will want to move forward with the decision for an underpass or the hybrid at the 15-percent decision point 2. During the first decision point, there will be articulation of the design assumptions, and the City will request design exceptions from Caltrain if needed. If there should not be propagation of design exceptions, the Rail Committee will provide further direction to staff in the subsequent phase of the development. Vice President Gibson added that TYLin will develop the Basis of Design Report to inform the 15 percent. Chair Burt wondered if there will be check-ins on the negotiation to ensure that TYLin will not proceed on an expensive design that the City may not want to proceed with. He voiced that he wants to know the right sequencing to resolve outstanding issues with Caltrain. Senior Engineer Bhatia believed that at decision point 1 the design assumptions will be outlined and that the Rail Committee will be able to review and discuss the assumptions before proceeding with the 15-percent design. Vice President Gibson declared that they will include the input on the outreach plan in their revised draft. 2. South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity: Provide Feedback on Initial Crossing Opportunity Locations and Draft Design Priorities and Evaluation Criteria. Senior Planner Office of Transportation Charlie Coles noted that the Staff Report provides an overview of the project and work completed to date. He recommended that the Rail Committee review the Existing Conditions Report and the Draft Goals and Design Priorities Memorandum. He provided an overview of the project. He shared slides and outlined project objectives. The purpose of the project is to improve bicycle and pedestrian access across the rail corridor focusing on the southern portion of the city. The goal is to identify preferred locations and design concepts for 2 new grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings of the Caltrain corridor. Each of the preferred concepts will be developed into 15-percent design and ultimately packaged into a final plan. The final plan will include an implementation plan and SUMMARY MINUTES Page 10 of 12 Sp. Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 5/20/2025 funding strategy. The project team will seek to secure funding for final design and construction. He emphasized that this is considered the conceptual planning phase of the overall project and one of the first steps in the process. A map was shared showing the project study area. He discussed how the project team decided on the study area. Several citywide plans and studies identified the need for additional grade-separated bicycle and pedestrian crossings, particularly in the southern portion of the city. The project implements recommendations of previous plans and studies to address mobility gaps and barriers to walking and biking. A slide was supplied showing the timeline of the project process and community engagement. Existing conditions have been reviewed and community engagement is in Phase 1. Staff is working with the community to establish design priorities for the crossing alternatives analysis. Next, the project team will develop and share with the community crossing alternatives for feedback in Phase 2. Following Phase 2, there will be refinements of the crossing alternatives and then a public draft report will be released for review and comment in Phase 3. The Phase 4 goal is to obtain Council adoption of a final report. The project team will also work to secure funding for next steps, applying for grant funding in the summer of 2026. Next steps will include environmental review, final design, and construction. There will be multiple Council discussions throughout the project at each phase and engagement. During Phase 2, the community will be asked to select 2 preferred crossings as staff prepares the draft and final reports. There will be community engagement through a variety of means. The online survey will be live through May 22, which currently has almost 700 responses. The Existing Conditions Report is available online and included in the agenda packet. A variety of data sources have been reviewed to capture a reasonable representation of the existing conditions. Staff anticipated combining this data with data gathered in community input during Phase 1 and future phases. The Staff Report includes findings from the Existing Conditions Report, which includes a list of potential crossing opportunity locations. He spoke of the work done on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Accessibility and Big Data analyses and the information they contain, which is referenced starting on Packet Page 99. He requested that the Committee provide feedback on potential crossing locations identified by staff and which should be prioritized or eliminated and if there are desired locations not identified. He outlined the 6 locations (labeled A through F) staff identified. The draft design priorities are in the agenda packet. He requested feedback on the importance of the priorities and, if needed, on changing the definitions. A table listing the draft design priority and criteria and the proposed metrics intended to evaluate alternatives going forward during Phase 2 of the project was furnished. He requested feedback on the draft design and evaluation criteria. Public Comment: 1. Roland opined that the methodology being used is not appropriate. Moving forward, he will share information on how Japan and Malaysia addresses such. He voiced that significant economies of scale can be achieved if you can alignment on the actual size of the pedestrian underpass. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 11 of 12 Sp. Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 5/20/2025 2. John M remarked that bicycle underpasses are worthwhile. He requested that a question be posed to the community asking if they will favor the project if it will harm a neighbor or their property. 3. Melinda M suggested that there be a bike crossing between Midtown and California Avenue. She stated that she wants to separate out those that want a crossing because it will be nice and those that will be harmed and that she wants the focus to be on those who will be impacted the most. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims requested that the next iteration mention the San Antonio Area Plan, Gunn for Area D, and other major things happening that this will tie into. She did not see a reference to Vision Zero and the Safe Systems approach. She discussed why she urged removing from the next report the imagery of a viaduct and a trench as grade separation solutions. Mayor Lauing questioned if staff should prioritize or rank the options to provide focus to the Committee. City Manager Ed Shikada stated that he thinks staff is considering 8 alternatives as part of the evaluation, and he wants to ensure those 8 are correct. Co-Founder Californians Advocating Responsible Rail Design (CARRD) Nadia Naik noted that she does not see a good measurement for how new crossings will open up new geographies. It may be helpful to have an overlay of where housing will be added and upzoned. Locations B and F might offer some of the best opportunities. Chair Burt stated that B has been identified as a priority location for almost 2 decades and he does not see that metric in the criteria. Distance and time to a track crossing are important factors. There are no safe crossings on Alma. Regarding new geographies, he asked what trips will be opened and who might move from driving to biking. Location B will open up Stanford Research Park to Midtown. Stanford Research Park can supply a map identifying where their employees reside. He added that they will be good partners. It will be valuable to include the high school map on the map. He asked if prospective modeling will be provided. Senior Planner Coles replied that staff will address prospective modeling with the consultant team in the next week or two. It uses existing data, but he understood that it is a model, so some forecasting can be done as changes are made to things like the transportation network. Associate Planner Kittelson & Associates Amanda Leahy added that the replica model data is based on existing conditions and forecast volumes will not be obtained from them but they plan on using VTA model data that has been updated with the Housing Element information and informed by the Area plans to understand population, land use change, and future growth and what ridership, walking, and biking may look like in the future. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 12 of 12 Sp. Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 5/20/2025 Chair Burt voiced that there is a shortage of what is called north-south routes but east-west is the problem. He questioned where it will be most advantageous in feeding that whole network, new housing, existing jobs, etc. He voiced that location B is important and that there is potential for a ramp running north-south and landing sites on the west side. A bike boulevard in the vicinity of El Carmelo could provide great continuity to the bay. He may eventually want to look at a second crossing. A number of the locations may relieve congestion at existing grade crossings and provide a relief valve during construction of a vehicular crossing. The aforesaid should be considered in the criteria. There is more funding available for the active transportation projects than the vehicular ones, so the sooner things can be narrowed down and applied the better. If there are no grants at a certain time, there is opportunity to tap into Measure B grade separation dollars. He added that he does not think a change in VTA criteria will be required to use those dollars. However, if it is required, he voiced that he thinks they will be onboard. In the event the first funding is not received, he does not want the project to come to a halt. Future Meetings and Agendas Senior Engineer Office of Transportation Ripon Bhatia noted that staff plans to return with a Quiet Zone review and review of the 15-percent refined concept plans. Chair Burt asked if a timeline will be provided for the Quiet Zone. He remarked that he wants to consider tightening the timeline. Senior Engineer Bhatia responded that he will look into that. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 8:29 p.m.